[Analysis of the frequency of cardiac arrhythmias and conduction disturbances from a health-care perspective].
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION AND
OBJECTIVES
Over the last few years, our understanding of the mechanisms underlying cardiac arrhythmias has increased substantially. However, few data on their prevalence exist. Our objectives were to analyze the prevalence of cardiac arrhythmias and conduction disturbances in cardiology clinic outpatients and to determine the number of patients with a class-I or -IIa recommendation for electrophysiological studies (EPS).
PATIENTS AND METHOD: We investigated cardiac arrhythmias and conduction disturbances in 2045 patients and determined their prevalence in those seen for the first time. Specific conditions investigated included supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias, ischemic disease with an ejection fraction (EF) <30%, second-degree or higher atrioventricular (AV) block, intraventricular block, and sick sinus syndrome.
RESULTS
In total, 798 (39%) of all patients and 153 of the 704 (22%) seen for the first time presented with 1 or more of the specified conditions. Their distribution in all patients was: atrial fibrillation, 524 (26%); atrial flutter, 34 (2%); narrow-QRS tachycardia, 58 (3%); ventricular arrhythmias or EF<30% due to ischemic disease or both, 46 (2%); AV block or sinus dysfunction, 68 (3%); intraventricular block, 157 (8%); and other conditions, 4 (0.2%). Some 7% (143/2045) of all patients and 3.5% (25/704) of those seen for the first time had an indication for EPS.
CONCLUSIONS
a) Almost 40% of all patients seen in a cardiology outpatient clinic and 1 in 4 of those seen for the first time presented with a cardiac arrhythmia or conduction disturbance; and b) more than 3% of patients seen for the first time had an indication for EPS.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.