房室结折返性心动过速不同消融终点有效性及安全性的Meta分析比较  

Meta Analysis for the Efficacy and Safety Between Different Ablation Endpoints in Patients With Atrioventricular Nodal Reentrant Tachycardia

作　　者：郭雨龙 刘爽[2] 

机构地区：[1]云南省阜外心血管病医院心内科,昆明市650000 [2]昆明医科大学第一附属医院风湿免疫科

出　　处：《中国循环杂志》2017年第9期894-898,共5页Chinese Circulation Journal

摘　　要：目的:慢径消融是房室结折返性心动过速(AVNRT)的根治方法。本研究用Meta分析,比较完全阻断慢径传导和慢径传导仍存两种主要消融终点的有效性及安全性。方法:计算机检索Pubmed、Cochrane Library、万方数据库、维普全文数据库,纳入比较AVNRT两种消融终点(A组:完全阻断慢径传导;B组:慢径传导仍存)的队列研究,应用Revman5.3进行Meta分析。结果:纳入24项研究,共4 799例患者。A组心动过速复发风险显著降低(OR=0.24,P<0.0001),两组房室传导阻滞发生风险之间的差异无统计学意义(OR=2.58,P=0.18)。结论:AVNRT患者以完全阻断慢径传导为消融终点时复发率显著降低,且房室传导阻滞风险不增加。Objective： Slow-pathway ablation is a radical cure method for treating atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia （AVNRT）. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety for the ablation endpoints between complete slow-pathway block and with residual slow-pathway conduction in AVNRT patients. Methods： We searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library and Wanfang, VIP data bases to enroll and compared the above 2 ablation endpoints. Our research was divided into 2 groups： Complete slow-pathway block group and Residual slow-pathway conduction group. Meta-analysis was performed by Revman5.3 software. Results： A total of 24 subjects and 4799 patients were enrolled. Compared with Residual slow-pathway conduction group, Complete slow-pathway block group had decreased risk for AVNRT recurrence （OR=0.24, P〈0.0001）; the risk for atrioventricular block occurrence was similar between 2 groups （OR=2.58, P=0.18）. Conclusion： Complete slow-pathway block has the lower AVNRT recurrent rate and it doesn＇t increase risk of atrioventricular block.

关 键 词：心动过速 房室结折返性 导管消融 治疗结果 

分 类 号：R54[医药卫生—心血管疾病]