张明龙, 杨文琦, 王晓东, 姜媛媛, 李留东. 左心室肥厚的心电图诊断新标准在中国人群中的诊断价值及其影响因素[J]. 心脏杂志, 2022, 34(2): 178-182. DOI: 10.12125/j.chj.202105003
    引用本文: 张明龙, 杨文琦, 王晓东, 姜媛媛, 李留东. 左心室肥厚的心电图诊断新标准在中国人群中的诊断价值及其影响因素[J]. 心脏杂志, 2022, 34(2): 178-182. DOI: 10.12125/j.chj.202105003
    Ming-long ZHANG, Wen-qi YANG, Xiao-dong WANG, Yuan-yuan JIANG, Liu-dong LI. Diagnostic efficacy and influencing factors of a new standard for diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy in Chinese population[J]. Chinese Heart Journal, 2022, 34(2): 178-182. DOI: 10.12125/j.chj.202105003
    Citation: Ming-long ZHANG, Wen-qi YANG, Xiao-dong WANG, Yuan-yuan JIANG, Liu-dong LI. Diagnostic efficacy and influencing factors of a new standard for diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy in Chinese population[J]. Chinese Heart Journal, 2022, 34(2): 178-182. DOI: 10.12125/j.chj.202105003

    左心室肥厚的心电图诊断新标准在中国人群中的诊断价值及其影响因素

    Diagnostic efficacy and influencing factors of a new standard for diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy in Chinese population

    • 摘要:
        目的  在中国人群中验证SD+SV4标准对左心室肥厚(left ventricular hypertrophy,LVH)的诊断效能,并分析影响其诊断准确性的因素。
        方法  纳入2017年1月~2019年12月期间就诊的高血压患者477例。以超声心动图参数计算的左心室质量指数(left ventricular mass index,LVMI)作为诊断LVH的金标准。使用ROC曲线评估SD+SV4、RavL+SV3和SV1+RV5/RV6标准诊断LVH的效能。使用多因素Logistic回归分析评估影响SD+SV4标准诊断LVH准确性的因素。
        结果  基于LVMI,共有139例(29.1%)患者诊断为LVH。女性中,SD+SV4标准的曲线下面积(area under curve, AUC)明显高于RavL+SV3(0.847 vs. 0.728,P<0.05)和SV1+RV5/RV6标准(0.847 vs. 0.706,P<0.05),且其灵敏度(79.2%)和特异度(94.4%)也高于其他两种诊断标准;而在男性中,SD+SV4标准与其他两种标准的AUC无显著统计学差异。调整其他因素后,仅左室射血分数(OR = 0.930,95%CI 0.902~0.961,P<0.01)在SD+SV4标准和金标准诊断与LVH一致性方面存在显著统计学差异。
        结论  新提出的SD+SV4标准在诊断LVH方面优于传统心电图标准诊断。左室射血分数降低是影响其诊断LVH准确性的独立影响因素。

       

      Abstract:
        AIM  To verify the diagnostic efficacy of SD+SV4 criterion for left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in the Chinese population and to analyze the factors influencing its diagnostic accuracy.
        METHODS  Patients with hypertension who were treated in our hospital from January 2017 to December 2019 were included. The left ventricular mass index (LVMI) calculated with echocardiographic parameters was used as the gold standard for diagnosing LVH in this study. The receiver operating curve (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the efficacy of SD+SV4, RavL+SV3 and SV1+RV5/RV6 criteria in diagnosing LVH. Moreover, multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the factors influencing the accuracy of the SD+SV4 standard in diagnosing LVH.
        RESULTS  A total of 477 patients were included in this study, with an average age of 59 ±14 years. Based on LVMI, 139 (29.1%) patients were diagnosed with LVH. In women patients, the area under curve (AUC) of the SD+SV4 criterion was significantly higher than those of the RavL+SV3 (0.847 vs. 0.728, P<0.05) and SV1+ RV5/RV6 criteria (0.847 vs. 0.706, P<0.05), and its sensitivity (79.2 %) and the specificity (94.4 %) were also higher than those of the other two diagnostic criteria. In men patients, there were no significant difference between the AUC of SD+SV4 criterion and the other two criteria. After adjusting for other factors, only the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (OR = 0.930, 95% CI 0.902~0.961, P<0.01) had significant differences in the consistency of the SD+SV4 criterion and the gold standard in the diagnosis of LVH. CONCLUSION The newly proposed SD+SV4 standard is better than the traditional electrocardiogram standard in diagnosing LVH. Decreased LVEF is an independent factor for the accuracy in diagnosing LVH.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回