QUANTIFICATION OF ARRHYTHMIAS USING SCORING SYSTEMS - AN EXAMINATION OF 7 SCORES IN AN INVIVO MODEL OF REGIONAL MYOCARDIAL ISCHEMIA
QUANTIFICATION OF ARRHYTHMIAS USING SCORING SYSTEMS - AN EXAMINATION OF 7 SCORES IN AN INVIVO MODEL OF REGIONAL MYOCARDIAL ISCHEMIA
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/cvr/22.9.656
复制
发表时间：
1988-09-01
影响因子：
10.8
通讯作者：
WALKER, MJA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
CURTIS, MJ;WALKER, MJA
心律失常评分近年来被用于分析心律失常，特别是与局部心肌缺血有关的心律失常。最近的兰贝斯公约建议谨慎使用心律失常评分，因为他们的使用可能会误导。在目前的研究中，七个评分系统被检查，试图验证心律失常评分的使用。所有7个分数之间存在很强的正相关。此外，这些评分均与早期心肌缺血时室性颤动、室性心动过速和室性早搏的发生率相关。所有七个评分都成功地检测到两种药物引起的心室颤动发生率的统计学显著降低。当对原始心律失常数据的影响没有统计学意义时，一些评分偶尔显示出统计学上显著的降低。在这方面，心律失常评分的参数统计分析可能是一种更敏感的量化心律失常的方法，而不是对二项分布的原始数据（如心室颤动的发生率）进行非参数分析（根据此类测试的功率），表明评分具有精度。然而，当原始数据表示统计上显著或不显著的增加时，没有一个分数错误地显示统计上显著的减少，这表明分数具有准确性。总之，设计许多心律失常评分来显示心律失常严重程度的变化是可能的，而更常规的分析只显示非统计上显著的趋势。当与原始心律失常数据、综合药物剂量范围和适当的参数统计检验结合使用时，心律失常评分有助于心律失常的量化。建议心律失常评分仅用于量化组数据和模型构建，而不用于个体预后目的。
Arrhythmia scores have been used in recent years to facilitate the analysis of arrhythmias, particularly in relation to regional myocardial ischaemia. The recent Lambeth Conventions recommended caution in the use of arrhythmia scores since their use may be misleading. In the present study seven scoring systems were examined in an attempt to validate the use of arrhythmia scores. A strong positive correlation was present between all seven scores. Furthermore, the scores all correlated with the incidences of ventricular fibrillation, ventricular tachycardia, and ventricular premature beats in early myocardial ischaemia. All seven scores successfully detected statistically significant reductions in the incidence of ventricular fibrillation resulting from the administration of two drugs. Some of the scores occasionally showed statistically significant reductions when effects on the raw arrhythmia data were not statistically significant. In this respect, parametric statistical analysis of arrhythmia scores may be a more sensitive method of quantifying arrhythmias than non-parametric analysis of binomially distributed raw data such as the incidence of ventricular fibrillation (in accordance with the power of such tests) indicating that the scores have precision. However, none of the scores incorrectly showed a statistically significant reduction when the raw data expressed a statistically significant or non-significant increase, indicating that the scores have accuracy. In conclusion, it is possible to design many arrhythmia scores that show changes in arrhythmia severity when more conventional analyses show only non-statistically significant trends. When used in conjunction with raw arrhythmia data, comprehensive drug dose ranges, and appropriate parametric statistical tests, arrhythmia scores facilitate the quantification of arrhythmias. It is recommended that arrhythmia scores should be used only for quantifying group data and model building and not for prognostic purposes in individuals.