中华老年多器官疾病杂志
中華老年多器官疾病雜誌
중화노년다기관질병잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF MULTIPLE ORGAN DISEASES IN THE ELDERLY
2014年
1期
10-15
,共6页
王松云%鲁志兵%余锂镭%黄兵%王卓%何文博%廖凯%萨仁高娃%阳康%江洪
王鬆雲%魯誌兵%餘鋰鐳%黃兵%王卓%何文博%廖凱%薩仁高娃%暘康%江洪
왕송운%로지병%여리뢰%황병%왕탁%하문박%료개%살인고왜%양강%강홍
心房颤动%射频消融术%复发%CHADS2评分%改良CHADS评分
心房顫動%射頻消融術%複髮%CHADS2評分%改良CHADS評分
심방전동%사빈소융술%복발%CHADS2평분%개량CHADS평분
atrial fibrillation%radiofrequency catheter ablation%recurrence%CHADS2 score%modified CHADS score
目的:探讨心力衰竭高血压、年龄、糖尿病和脑卒中(包括一过性脑缺血)(CHADS2)评分及改良CHADS评分对心房颤动(房颤)射频消融术后复发的预测价值。方法对2010年7月至2012年3月在我院行射频消融术的93例房颤患者追踪随访12个月,术后1,3,6,9,12个月行12导联心电图或长程心电图检查,结合临床症状及心电图检查结果将其分为复发组(n=40)和未复发组(n=53),采用单因素和多因素分析消融术后房颤复发的危险因素。结果93例房颤患者中持续性房颤35例(37.63%),随访12个月时复发40例(43.01%)。房颤复发组与未复发组在平均年龄(P<0.01)、年龄>70岁(P<0.05)、病史(P<0.05)、房颤类型(P<0.01)、左房内径(P<0.001)、左室射血分数(P<0.05)、血细胞比容(P<0.05)、是否伴心力衰竭(P<0.05)、是否伴高血压(P<0.01)、是否伴糖尿病(P<0.05)、是否有一过性脑缺血或脑卒中史(P<0.05)、术后是否服用血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂和血管紧张素Ⅱ受体拮抗剂(ACEI/ARB,P<0.01)、术后是否服用Ⅲ类抗心律失常药(P<0.05)、CHADS2评分≥1(P<0.001)等方面差异有统计学意义。logistic回归分析发现,病史、房颤类型、左房内径、CHADS2评分≥1为房颤术后复发的独立危险因素(病史长短:OR=1.16,P=0.020;左房内径:OR=1.17,P=0.025;房颤类型:OR=3.34,P=0.050;CHADS2评分≥1:OR=5.93,P=0.019)。进一步分析发现,CHADS2评分≥2、改良CHADS评分≥1、改良CHADS评分≥2亦为房颤术后复发的独立危险因素(CHADS2≥2:OR=5.42,P=0.028;改良CHADS评分≥1:OR=6.64,P=0.015;改良CHADS评分≥2:OR=7.32,P=0.002)。截断点分析显示,CHADS2与改良CHADS均≥1时对房颤消融预后的预测价值最高,对CHADS2评分≥1与改良CHADS评分≥1预测房颤消融预后的灵敏度、特异度、曲线下面积进行比较发现,差异均无统计学意义[分别为0.775 vs 0.800、0.358 vs 0.377、0.708(95%CI 0.601~0.806) vs 0.711(95%CI 0.605~0.818),均P>0.05]。结论病史长短、左房内径、房颤类型、CHADS2评分≥1、CHADS2评分≥2、改良CHADS评分≥1、改良CHADS评分≥2均为心房颤动消融术后复发的独立危险因素,且改良CHADS评分与CHADS2评分对房颤消融预后具有同等的预测价值。
目的:探討心力衰竭高血壓、年齡、糖尿病和腦卒中(包括一過性腦缺血)(CHADS2)評分及改良CHADS評分對心房顫動(房顫)射頻消融術後複髮的預測價值。方法對2010年7月至2012年3月在我院行射頻消融術的93例房顫患者追蹤隨訪12箇月,術後1,3,6,9,12箇月行12導聯心電圖或長程心電圖檢查,結閤臨床癥狀及心電圖檢查結果將其分為複髮組(n=40)和未複髮組(n=53),採用單因素和多因素分析消融術後房顫複髮的危險因素。結果93例房顫患者中持續性房顫35例(37.63%),隨訪12箇月時複髮40例(43.01%)。房顫複髮組與未複髮組在平均年齡(P<0.01)、年齡>70歲(P<0.05)、病史(P<0.05)、房顫類型(P<0.01)、左房內徑(P<0.001)、左室射血分數(P<0.05)、血細胞比容(P<0.05)、是否伴心力衰竭(P<0.05)、是否伴高血壓(P<0.01)、是否伴糖尿病(P<0.05)、是否有一過性腦缺血或腦卒中史(P<0.05)、術後是否服用血管緊張素轉換酶抑製劑和血管緊張素Ⅱ受體拮抗劑(ACEI/ARB,P<0.01)、術後是否服用Ⅲ類抗心律失常藥(P<0.05)、CHADS2評分≥1(P<0.001)等方麵差異有統計學意義。logistic迴歸分析髮現,病史、房顫類型、左房內徑、CHADS2評分≥1為房顫術後複髮的獨立危險因素(病史長短:OR=1.16,P=0.020;左房內徑:OR=1.17,P=0.025;房顫類型:OR=3.34,P=0.050;CHADS2評分≥1:OR=5.93,P=0.019)。進一步分析髮現,CHADS2評分≥2、改良CHADS評分≥1、改良CHADS評分≥2亦為房顫術後複髮的獨立危險因素(CHADS2≥2:OR=5.42,P=0.028;改良CHADS評分≥1:OR=6.64,P=0.015;改良CHADS評分≥2:OR=7.32,P=0.002)。截斷點分析顯示,CHADS2與改良CHADS均≥1時對房顫消融預後的預測價值最高,對CHADS2評分≥1與改良CHADS評分≥1預測房顫消融預後的靈敏度、特異度、麯線下麵積進行比較髮現,差異均無統計學意義[分彆為0.775 vs 0.800、0.358 vs 0.377、0.708(95%CI 0.601~0.806) vs 0.711(95%CI 0.605~0.818),均P>0.05]。結論病史長短、左房內徑、房顫類型、CHADS2評分≥1、CHADS2評分≥2、改良CHADS評分≥1、改良CHADS評分≥2均為心房顫動消融術後複髮的獨立危險因素,且改良CHADS評分與CHADS2評分對房顫消融預後具有同等的預測價值。
목적:탐토심력쇠갈고혈압、년령、당뇨병화뇌졸중(포괄일과성뇌결혈)(CHADS2)평분급개량CHADS평분대심방전동(방전)사빈소융술후복발적예측개치。방법대2010년7월지2012년3월재아원행사빈소융술적93례방전환자추종수방12개월,술후1,3,6,9,12개월행12도련심전도혹장정심전도검사,결합림상증상급심전도검사결과장기분위복발조(n=40)화미복발조(n=53),채용단인소화다인소분석소융술후방전복발적위험인소。결과93례방전환자중지속성방전35례(37.63%),수방12개월시복발40례(43.01%)。방전복발조여미복발조재평균년령(P<0.01)、년령>70세(P<0.05)、병사(P<0.05)、방전류형(P<0.01)、좌방내경(P<0.001)、좌실사혈분수(P<0.05)、혈세포비용(P<0.05)、시부반심력쇠갈(P<0.05)、시부반고혈압(P<0.01)、시부반당뇨병(P<0.05)、시부유일과성뇌결혈혹뇌졸중사(P<0.05)、술후시부복용혈관긴장소전환매억제제화혈관긴장소Ⅱ수체길항제(ACEI/ARB,P<0.01)、술후시부복용Ⅲ류항심률실상약(P<0.05)、CHADS2평분≥1(P<0.001)등방면차이유통계학의의。logistic회귀분석발현,병사、방전류형、좌방내경、CHADS2평분≥1위방전술후복발적독립위험인소(병사장단:OR=1.16,P=0.020;좌방내경:OR=1.17,P=0.025;방전류형:OR=3.34,P=0.050;CHADS2평분≥1:OR=5.93,P=0.019)。진일보분석발현,CHADS2평분≥2、개량CHADS평분≥1、개량CHADS평분≥2역위방전술후복발적독립위험인소(CHADS2≥2:OR=5.42,P=0.028;개량CHADS평분≥1:OR=6.64,P=0.015;개량CHADS평분≥2:OR=7.32,P=0.002)。절단점분석현시,CHADS2여개량CHADS균≥1시대방전소융예후적예측개치최고,대CHADS2평분≥1여개량CHADS평분≥1예측방전소융예후적령민도、특이도、곡선하면적진행비교발현,차이균무통계학의의[분별위0.775 vs 0.800、0.358 vs 0.377、0.708(95%CI 0.601~0.806) vs 0.711(95%CI 0.605~0.818),균P>0.05]。결론병사장단、좌방내경、방전류형、CHADS2평분≥1、CHADS2평분≥2、개량CHADS평분≥1、개량CHADS평분≥2균위심방전동소융술후복발적독립위험인소,차개량CHADS평분여CHADS2평분대방전소융예후구유동등적예측개치。
Objective To determine the value of cardiac failure, hypertension, age, diabetes and stroke 2 (CHADS2) and modified CHADS score to predict the recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) after radiofrequency catheter ablation. Methods A total of 93 consecutive patients with nonvalvular AF who received catheter ablation in our department from July 2010 to March 2012 were enrolled in this study. They were all followed up for at least 12 months. Electrocardiography or 24-hour Holter monitoring was conducted in these patients in 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after ablation. They were divided into AF recurrence group (n=40) and AF recurrence-free group (n=53) according to clinical manifestations and electrocardiographic results. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to find which variable was related with the risk of AF recurrence. Results There were 35 cases (37.65%) of persistent AF out of 93 AF patients, and 40 of them (43.01%) had AF recurrence in 12 months after ablation. Univariate analysis revealed that average age (P<0.01), age>70 years (P<0.05), medical history (P<0.05), type of AF (P<0.01), left atrial diameter (LAD, P<0.001), left ventricular ejection fraction (P<0.05), hematocrit (P<0.05), accompanied with congestive heart failure (P<0.05), hypertension (P<0.01), diabetes (P<0.05), prior stroke or transient cerebral ischemic attack (P<0.05), post-operative administration of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin Ⅱ receptor blocker (ACEI/ARB, P<0.01) or class Ⅲ antiarrhythmic drugs (P<0.05),` and CHADS2 score ≥1 (P<0.001) were significantly related with the outcome of nonvalvular AF after ablation. Logistic analysis showed that medical history (OR=1.16, P=0.020), LAD (OR=1.17, P=0.025), type of AF (OR=3.34, P=0.050), and CHADS2 score≥1 (OR=5.93, P=0.019) were independent predictors of AF recurrence after ablation. CHADS2 score ≥2 (OR=5.42, P=0.028), modified CHADS score ≥1 (OR=6.64, P=0.015) and modified CHADS score ≥2 (OR=7.32, P=0.002) were also the independent risk factors of recurrence. Cut-off analysis showed that both CHADS2 score and modified CHADS score ≥1 showed the highest predictive value for AF recurrence. There was no significant difference in the sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver’s operating characteristic (AUC) curve for the 2 scores both ≥1 [0.775 vs 0.800, 0.358 vs 0.377, 0.708(95%CI 0.601-0.806) vs 0.711(95%CI 0.605-0.818), all P>0.05]. Conclusion Medical history, LAD, type of AF, CHADS2 score ≥1, CHADS2 score ≥2, modified CHADS score ≥1, and modified CHADS score ≥2 are independent predictors of the recurrence of AF after ablation. And the modified CHADS score has similar value as CHADS2 score in the predicton.