室性心动过速患者被误诊为室上性心动过速,并按误诊治疗,并非罕见。在英国,Dancy等首先促使人们注意此问题,现在其他国家也显然遇到此问题。误诊情况下的发病率与死亡率颇难估计,但仅据两项少数病例研究,可知很多病人(44％)因误用异搏定而受到危害性副作用。这两项研究报告虽来自专科中心,但没有理由认为这类错误在综合性医院就不常见。为什么造成误诊?我们现有的诊断标准不确切?抑或我们根本不引用这些标准? 诚然,诊断标准不会完善无缺,但总比一般想像的好得多。在被误诊的室性心动过速一组病人,回顾起来,如能恪守既定的诊断标准,92％的病人原可得到正确诊断。假如标准本身无可非议,那么误诊率高(据最近通讯调查为53％)的原因一定是不知道或不会正确运 It is not uncommon for patients with ventricular tachycardia to be misdiagnosed as supraventricular tachycardia and to be treated as misdiagnosed. In the UK, Dancy and others first drew attention to this issue, and now it is clear that other countries have encountered this problem. Morbidity and mortality are misdiagnosed in misdiagnosed cases, but only in two minority case studies shows that many patients (44%) suffer from harmful side effects due to misuse of verapamil. Although these two studies come from specialist centers, there is no reason to suppose that such errors are less common in general hospitals. Why misdiagnosis? Are not our current diagnostic criteria incorrect? Or are we not referring to them? True, diagnostic criteria are not perfect, but they are always better than generally thought. In a group of patients who were misdiagnosed with ventricular tachycardia, in retrospect, 92% of patients were correctly diagnosed if they adhered to the established diagnostic criteria. If the standard itself is beyond reproach, the reason for the high rate of misdiagnosis (according to a recent survey of 53%) must not be known or correct