期刊文献+

不同起搏房室传导间期对右室起搏比例影响的临床观察

下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的评估起搏器程控不同起搏房室传导间期减少右心室起搏的临床疗效和安全性。方法因病态窦房结综合征而植入Medtronic双腔起搏器的患者35例,将AVD程控为长于静息时PR间期30 ms,及AVD程控为固定长间期310 ms组。观察患者心房心室的起搏阈值、感知、导线阻抗的变化、心房心室起搏比例、房颤、心功能状态等情况3个月。并与起搏器默认AVD组进行比较。结果 AVD长于静息时PR间期30ms组心室起搏比例为20.6%,明显低于默认AVD组,比例52.5%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),AVD为固定长间期310 ms组心室起搏比例6.25%,明显低于默认AVD组及AVD长于静息时PR间期30 ms组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),未观察到与起搏器有关的不良作用。结论对于植入了无最小化心室起搏功能的起搏器的患者,可尽量采用延长起搏房室传导间期的方法鼓励自身窦性心搏下传或心房起搏经房室结下传,达到减少右心室起搏百分比目的,从而减少右室心尖部起搏的不良作用。但要注意过长的AV间期使二尖瓣早期关闭,限制了舒张期充盈时间对心功能的影响,其安全范围仍需进一步的远期观察。
出处 《中国医药指南》 2014年第28期136-137,共2页 Guide of China Medicine
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

  • 1Ovsyshcher IE.Toward physiological pacing:optimization d cardiac bemodynamics by AV delay adj[J].Pacing Clin Eloctrophysiol,1997,20(4 Pt 1):861-865.
  • 2Lamas GA,Lee KL.Ventricular pacing or dual chamber pacing for sinus-node dydfunction [J].N Engl J Med,2002,346(24):1854- 1862.
  • 3Connolly SJ,Kerr CR.Effects of physiologic pacing versus ventricular pacing on the rick of stroke and death due[J].N Engl J Med,2000,342(19):1385-91.
  • 4Wilkoff BL,Cook JR.Dual-chamber pacing or ventricular backup pacing in patients with an implantable defibrillator[J].JAMA,200 2,288(24):3115-3123.
  • 5郭继鸿.最小化心室起搏优势的新证据[J].中国心脏起搏与心电生理杂志,2008,22(4):283-286. 被引量:21
  • 6马建新,李运田,郭继鸿.生理性起搏的临床进展[J].中华老年心脑血管病杂志,2008,10(10):795-796. 被引量:3

二级参考文献16

  • 1Connolly SJ, Kerr CR, Gent M, et al. Effects of physiologic pacing versus ventricular pacing on the risk of stroke and death due to cardiovascular causes:Canadian Trial of Physiologic Pacing Investigations[ J ]. N Engl J Med ,2000,342 : 1 385
  • 2Lamas GA, Lee KL, Sweeney MO, et al. Ventricular pacing or dualchamber pacing for sinus-node dydfunction [ J ]. N Engl J Med ,2002, 346 : 1 854
  • 3Lamas GA,Lee K,Sweeney M,et al. The Mode Selection Trial(MOST) in sinus node dysfunction design ,rationale,and baseline characteristics of the first 1 000 patients[J]. Am Heart J,2000,140:541
  • 4Toff WD, Camm AJ,Skehan JD. United Kingdom Pacing: Cardiovascular Events Trial Investigation. Single-chamber versus dual-chamber pacing for high-grade arioventricular block [ J ]. N Engl J Med ,2005, 353 : 145
  • 5John GF,Alison P,Tageldien A,et al. Clinical trials update from Heart Rhythm 2007 and Heart Failure 2007 : CARISMA, PREPARE, DAVID Ⅱ,SAVE-PACE, PROTECT and AREA-IN-CHF[ J ]. European Journal of Heart Failure,2007,9:850
  • 6Charles RK, Stuart JC, Hoshiar A, et al. Canadian trial of physiological pacing effects during long-term follow-up. Circulation, 2004,109 : 357-363.
  • 7Michael OS, Ann SH,Kenneth AE, et al. Adverse effect of ventricular pacing on heart failure and atrial fibrillation among patients with normal baseline QRS duration in a clinical trial of pacemaker therapy for sinus node dysfunction. Circulation, 2003,107: 2932-2987.
  • 8Toff WD, Camm AJ, Skehan JD, et al. Single-chamber versus dual-chamber pacing for high-grade atrioventricular block. N Engl J Med,2005,353:145-155.
  • 9Nielsen JC, Kristensen L, Andersen H, et al. A randomized comparison of atrial and dual-chamber pacing in 177 consecutive patients with sick sinus syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2003,42:614-623.
  • 10Sweeney MO, Hellkamp AS, Ellenbogen KA, et al. Adverse effect of ventricular pacing on heart failure and atrial fibrillation among patients with normal baseline QRS duration in a clinical trial of pacemaker therapy for sinus node dysfunction. Circulation, 2003,107: 29-33.

共引文献22

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部