Talk:Premature ventricular contraction

Physiology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to the physiology of the heart.

Medicine: Cardiology Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Cardiology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Premature ventricular contraction.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on 15 February 2009. Further details are available here.

Relleh22hctac (talk) 07:55, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tombuckley23.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alcohol

Alcohol and tobacco are not "illicit substances." In fact, given that this a medical article and not one about the law or society, it's not clear why the legal status of cocaine and methamphetamine needs to be characterized. Therefore, I have deleted "illicit substances such as ...," so that the article now reads simply "include the use of cocaine ..." Essex9999 159.14.24.147 16:57, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It might depend on what part of the world you're in. I believe that alcohol is banned in some very strict Muslim countries. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:44, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

African Americans?

The article contains the following text: "... in large, population-based studies African Americans are known to have an increased occurrence of almost 30% compared with individuals of the Caucasian race." It is in appropriate for a global resource like Wikipedia to use such a US-centric term. --ChrisEich 00:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do something..

To be honest I was shocked to find an article about a medical subject like this, with potential high importance to sufferers of this condition, without any sources whatsoever. I really think someone needs to patrol for articles like this and do something about it, unfortunately I am not in the medical business so I leave it to the appropriate community to tackle this. Thanks. 87.127.94.57 01:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Throwing" PVCs

I have heard the term "Throwing PVCs" used to indicate that a patient has PVCs. Does anyone know about this? Josh 20:31, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PVC During Appendectomy

Now, this is just in a game (though it was voted one of the more medically accurate ones), but I noticed a PVC reading in this video of an appendectomy, as well as bradycardia, treated with lidocaine and atropine respectively. I'd like a doctor, if they have time, to review the procedure and tell me if that would actually be plauisible, both as a cause and treatment. Since this is just a game, don't treat me like I'm asking for advice, I'll get to treating patients when I'm not 14. (I'll be much older, in fact.) Here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5azQdQR35E&feature=related The cardiac events happen at: 3:52, almost 10 seconds after the Glucose IV is put in instead of a blood bag. 4:20, nearly 30 seconds after the PVC. Note that this is still a game, so exact times will vary quite a bit in any real life experiences, since normal operations don't take around 5 minutes. 23:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

PVC frequently occurs spontaneously with no cause.

Should this not read:

"PVC frequently occurs spontaneously with no known cause." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.97.255.66 (talk) 09:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A mention of the R-on-T phenomenon?

Should this article not mention the R-on-T phenomenon, which basically is when a PVC ruins the T wave of the preceding beat, usually causing ventricular fibrillation (and thus risk of cardiac arrest and sudden death)? 70.26.71.233 (talk) 04:35, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The image PVC10.JPG in the infobox is upside down!!

I may be mistaking and I am not a trained cardiologist. But I am pretty certain that the image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PVC10.JPG used in the infobox is upside down; it should be flipped vertically! Simply compare it to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:VPC_1.png and you can see for yourself. If so, this is a very serious mistake!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.27.19.219 (talk) 20:54, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extrasystole

Currently when I search on wiki it links here. Shouldn't that work link to Premature atrial contraction as well? E.g. a Disambiguation page? Now it might be confusing for people if they search for extrasystole and always arrive here. 95.96.90.146 (talk) 04:23, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, there is a confusion between extrasystole and premature ventricular contraction and premature atrial contraction Zygimantus (talk) 10:36, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

lethal dysrhythmia

I have removed a line from the lead stating that PVCs can lead to a lethal dysrhythmia. This could be true, but it would be very rare and I think having it in the lead would give it undue emphasis. If it does appear somewhere else in the article, I think we should be very cautious in its wording so the reader understands its rarity. People who have PVCs are going to be looking here for information and we don't want them to think their condition is more dangerous than it is.--Taylornate (talk) 19:10, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As you may or may not be aware, Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia. The purpose is not to coddle certain people, but to share facts, however "Rare" you think they may be. I will once again undo this removal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.39.94.115 (talk) 10:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and if we lead the reader to believe that something is more dangerous than it is then we have failed in that purpose. As it stands, the lead has more words about it being fatal than about it being benign. That does not lead the reader to truth.--Taylornate (talk) 10:29, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, the purpose of the lead is to summarize the rest of the article, which does not mention this.--Taylornate (talk) 10:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lastly, I am skeptical of you slipping this into a reference that is already there.--Taylornate (talk) 10:35, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Most cases of premature ventricular contraction have a mitral-valve prolapse...

This article specifically states, "Most cases of premature ventricular contraction have a mitral-valve prolapse which can be determined through the physical examination." and gives a reference. However that is not what is stated in the reference.

The reference specifically states that, "Although a physician rarely has an opportunity to examine a patient during an episode of palpitations, the physical examination is useful in defining potential cardiovascular abnormalities that could serve as a substrate for arrhythmias. A notable example is the midsystolic click of mitral-valve prolapse. Virtually every type of supraventricular arrhythmia, as well as ventricular premature depolarizations and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, has been described with mitral-valve prolapse, and palpitations are nearly ubiquitous in this disorder."

Though the named conditions in the actual reference are associated with PVC's, PVC's themselves, are a symptom of the conditions mentioned, which, as stated, have mitral valve prolapse and subsequent midsystolic click, as a clinical finding. Clearly this reference was taken out of context.

Updating of the article is required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.77.111.185 (talk) 04:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Time between preceding and proceeding QRS waves

Is it really correct, that the time between a QRS wave preceding an extrasystole and the proceeding doesn't change? I don't have access to the cited source, but even for the ECG image in the article this is not true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mashehu (talk • contribs) 09:11, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Causes section: "Smoking"

In the "Causes" section, "Smoking" is listed but the associated footnote references a study concerning air pollution -- not smoking -- as a possible factor in this medical condition. Further, while it's true that tobacco use and specifically nicotine consumption are possible causes of PVC, "Smoking" seems vague and uninformative in the context of this list; somewhat akin to listing "coffee drinking" instead of caffeine. 207.224.186.182 (talk) 23:56, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Potential Additions to Bibliography

These are some sources that I feel can help to add more in depth information to this article, some may already be a part of the references listed, but I feel there is information in them that is not yet present in the article and could help to better this article as a whole. http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/premature-ventricular-contractions/basics/definition/con-20030205

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/761148-overview#a7

http://www.medicinenet.com/premature_ventricular_contractions/page1.htm

http://www.merckmanuals.com/home/heart-and-blood-vessel-disorders/abnormal-heart-rhythms/ventricular-premature-beats

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11868062

http://circep.ahajournals.org/content/5/1/229 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tombuckley23 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

This article has a lot of prevalent information that is already listed but I do think more information in the prevalence subsection might be beneficial, especially to someone who is doing research. I also think that a section could be added regarding the risk factor of this contraction which would also be a beneficial addition to this article. They do list certain symptoms, treatments, etc. but a risk factor section would make this article just that much better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfigueroa12 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ejection fraction

The article has contained the following sentence for quite a long time: "Asymptomatic patients that do not have heart disease have long-term prognoses very similar to the general population, but asymptomatic patients that have ejection fractions greater than 40% have a 3.5% incidence of sustained ventricular tachycardia or cardiac arrest." It appears to be derived from the reference (https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/761148-overview), specifically the following paragraph:

In asymptomatic patients without underlying heart disease, the long-term prognosis is similar to that of the general population. Asymptomatic patients with ejection fractions greater than 40% have a 3.5% incidence of sustained ventricular tachycardia or cardiac arrest. Therefore, in patients with no evidence of heart disease on noninvasive workup, reassurance is appropriate.

I think the word "but" in the Wikipedia sentence is a misunderstanding of the reference, which tends to invert the meaning of it -- the reference seems to be saying (in line with what I understand to be typical) that higher ejection fractions have a better prognosis, whereas the Wikipedia sentence with "but" seems to be saying the opposite. (I'm not fixing it myself only because (1) it's been there a long time untouched, and (2) I have no expertise in the field, so I'd like to hear at least a second opinion first.) User:Glenn Willen (Talk) 09:46, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Avoiding an edit war, discussion of PVCs as "normal"

An IP has been trying to change the article, removing references and labelling PVCs as "normal". PVCs, while they can occur in otherwise healthy people, are not "normal". Ifnord (talk) 17:06, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PVC's due to Covid

COVID-19 is also known to weaken heart function, precipitating abnormal rhythms from the lower parts of the heart known as premature ventricular contractions (PVC) and ventricular tachycardia (VT)[1] Flibbertigibbets (talk) 22:37, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]