The weekend received another long-distance from acquaintances in their hometowns who asked for advice and help – a young man, the examination of the traffic police, because the medical examination with premature beats, and “by heart disease”, was “stuck”. …. The patient’s parents were a thousand anxious and anxious, not knowing how serious their child’s heart condition was, and after half a day of explanation, the patient’s family thanked me a thousand times and asked me to help “think of a solution”. A sigh of relief – I wonder how many children and young people are still being deprived of the opportunity to attend physical education classes, to become police officers, to become members of the People’s Liberation Army, to become civil servants and to become party cadets because of this functional premature beat, which is not related to heart disease! Still, a few more words are in order. Premature ventricular contractions are one of the most common arrhythmias, and 70-80% of the population, in general, has premature contractions. The vast majority of them are benign premature beats, or functional premature beats, both those without structural problems in the heart. Functional premature ventricular contractions are those in which the echocardiogram does not indicate a significant structural lesion. There is no consensus on the need for MRI, and it is up to the cardiologist to decide whether or not it is necessary. Functional premature beats are not heart disease. Functional premature beats can occur in many normal people and are a normal variant. Some people are sensitive to premature beats and have obvious symptoms; others are not sensitive and have no obvious symptoms – 24-hour ambulatory ECG monitoring confirms that in most patients with functional premature beats, the severity of their symptoms is not related to the number and “severity” of the beats. These functional premature beats are not related to heart disease. Because functional premature beats are related to heart problems, something that is originally like a white hair on our head has long been considered a “heart attack”. The following false and irresponsible “medical” rumors about premature beats are also widespread: Atrial premature beats are prone to develop into atrial fibrillation, which eventually leads to stroke – the dangers of stroke are well known, ha ha! Ventricular premature beats are dangerous and can easily progress to ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation, which can kill people. –The above false “rumors” either come from the ignorance of quacks, or patients’ wallets have been targeted. The latest consensus: In August 2014, the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), the American Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) jointly released the Expert Consensus on Ventricular Arrhythmias, which is of great value to clinicians in diagnosis and management. The recommendations for functional ventricular premature beats are as follows: 1. Because the vast majority of patients with frequent ventricular premature beats do not progress to cardiomyopathy, ventricular premature beats do not serve as a risk predictor for cardiomyopathy. –Dr. Zhou’s comment: The above is a golden bar that crushes over-screening and over-treatment of premature beats. 2, most patients with functional ventricular premature without structural heart disease and no symptoms, their ventricular premature is benign and does not need treatment; — Dr. Zhou comments: functional ventricular premature itself is not a disease, so why should it be over-treated? 3. For symptomatic and high-load patients (those with more than 10,000 functional premature beats detected by 24-hour ambulatory ECG monitoring), beta-blockers and non-dihydropyridine calcium antagonists can be considered, and anti-arrhythmic drugs such as amiodarone, which have obvious side effects, are not recommended. Like amiodarone, cardioplegia (Eflorn) should not be used easily for a long time. 4. For patients with monomorphic ventricular premature with obvious symptoms, frequent episodes and easy to mark, it is an indication for catheter ablation. –Dr. Zhou’s comment: For patients with monomorphic ventricular premature who do not have effective explanations, have obvious symptoms, have frequent episodes, and are easy to mark, radiofrequency ablation can be tried, but patients must be informed that this is an invasive treatment and has a certain recurrence rate.