Current permanent right ventricular and right atrial endocardial pacing leads are implanted utilizing a central lumen stylet. Right ventricular apex pacing initiates an abnormal asynchronous electrical activation patt...Current permanent right ventricular and right atrial endocardial pacing leads are implanted utilizing a central lumen stylet. Right ventricular apex pacing initiates an abnormal asynchronous electrical activation pattern, which results in asynchronous ventricular contraction and relaxation. When pacing from right atrial appendage, the conduction time between two atria will be prolonged, which results in heterogeneity for both depolarization and repolarization. Six patients with Class Ⅰ indication for permanent pacing were implanted with either single chamber or dual chamber pacemaker. The SelectSecure 3830 4-French （Fr） lumenless lead and the SelectSite C304 8.5-Fr steerable catheter-sheath （Medtronic Inc., USA） were used. Pre-selected pacing sites included inter-atrial septum and right ventricular outflow tract, which were defined by ECG and fluoroscopic criteria. All the implanting procedures were successful without complication. Testing results （mean atrial pacing threshold： 0.87 V; mean P wave amplitude： 2.28 mV; mean ventricular pacing threshold： 0.53V; mean R wave amplitude： 8.75 mV） were satisfactory. It is concluded that implantation of a 4-Fr lumenless pacing lead by using a streerable catheter-sheath to achieve inter-atrial septum or right ventricular outflow tract pacing is safe and feasible.展开更多
Objective Right ventricular outflow tract septum has become widely used us an electrode placement site. However, data concerning lead performances and complications for lead repositioning with this technique were scan...Objective Right ventricular outflow tract septum has become widely used us an electrode placement site. However, data concerning lead performances and complications for lead repositioning with this technique were scant. The purpose of this study was to observe long- term lead performances and complications of right ventricular outflow tract septal pacing and provide evidences for choosing an optimal electrode implantation site. Methods Thirty-six patients with septal active electrode implantation and 39 with apical passive electrode implantation were enrolled in this study. Pacing threshold, R-wave sensing, lead impedance, pacing QRS width and pacing-related compli- cations for two groups at implantation and follow-up were compared. Results There were higher pacing threshold and shorter pacing QRS width at implantation in the septal group compared with the apical group. There were no differences between the septal and the apical groups in pacing threshold, R-wave sensitivity, lead impedance and pace-related complication during a follow-up. Conclusions Right ventricular outflow tract septum could be used as a first choice for implantation site because it had long-term stable lead performances and no serious complications compared with the traditional apical site.展开更多
目的:观察主动电极在右室流出道间隔部起搏安全性和可行性。方法:80例需起搏器植入的患者,随机入组,采用VVI或DDD起搏模式,右室流出道间隔部起搏(RVOTS组)和右心室心尖部起搏(RVA组)各40例,观察两组在术中及术后的各项参数以及起搏心电...目的:观察主动电极在右室流出道间隔部起搏安全性和可行性。方法:80例需起搏器植入的患者,随机入组,采用VVI或DDD起搏模式,右室流出道间隔部起搏(RVOTS组)和右心室心尖部起搏(RVA组)各40例,观察两组在术中及术后的各项参数以及起搏心电图的QRS宽度。结果:两组患者均顺利完成手术,两组各1例术后发生电极脱位。全部手术无严重并发症出现。RVOTS组手术X线曝光时间明显延长(19.8±6.4 vs 10.3±4.8,P<0.01);术中心室的起搏阈值RVOTS组高于RVA组(0.61±0.23 vs 0.48±0.17,P<0.05),但术后1个月及3个月无统计学差异,两组间阻抗、感知在术中及术后无统计学差异,起搏心电图QRS波宽度无统计学差异。结论:主动电极在右室流出道间隔部起搏是安全和可行的。展开更多
基金supported by a grant form a Program of Science and Technology Development of Hubei Province (2004AA304B09).
文摘Current permanent right ventricular and right atrial endocardial pacing leads are implanted utilizing a central lumen stylet. Right ventricular apex pacing initiates an abnormal asynchronous electrical activation pattern, which results in asynchronous ventricular contraction and relaxation. When pacing from right atrial appendage, the conduction time between two atria will be prolonged, which results in heterogeneity for both depolarization and repolarization. Six patients with Class Ⅰ indication for permanent pacing were implanted with either single chamber or dual chamber pacemaker. The SelectSecure 3830 4-French （Fr） lumenless lead and the SelectSite C304 8.5-Fr steerable catheter-sheath （Medtronic Inc., USA） were used. Pre-selected pacing sites included inter-atrial septum and right ventricular outflow tract, which were defined by ECG and fluoroscopic criteria. All the implanting procedures were successful without complication. Testing results （mean atrial pacing threshold： 0.87 V; mean P wave amplitude： 2.28 mV; mean ventricular pacing threshold： 0.53V; mean R wave amplitude： 8.75 mV） were satisfactory. It is concluded that implantation of a 4-Fr lumenless pacing lead by using a streerable catheter-sheath to achieve inter-atrial septum or right ventricular outflow tract pacing is safe and feasible.
文摘Objective Right ventricular outflow tract septum has become widely used us an electrode placement site. However, data concerning lead performances and complications for lead repositioning with this technique were scant. The purpose of this study was to observe long- term lead performances and complications of right ventricular outflow tract septal pacing and provide evidences for choosing an optimal electrode implantation site. Methods Thirty-six patients with septal active electrode implantation and 39 with apical passive electrode implantation were enrolled in this study. Pacing threshold, R-wave sensing, lead impedance, pacing QRS width and pacing-related compli- cations for two groups at implantation and follow-up were compared. Results There were higher pacing threshold and shorter pacing QRS width at implantation in the septal group compared with the apical group. There were no differences between the septal and the apical groups in pacing threshold, R-wave sensitivity, lead impedance and pace-related complication during a follow-up. Conclusions Right ventricular outflow tract septum could be used as a first choice for implantation site because it had long-term stable lead performances and no serious complications compared with the traditional apical site.
文摘目的:观察主动电极在右室流出道间隔部起搏安全性和可行性。方法:80例需起搏器植入的患者,随机入组,采用VVI或DDD起搏模式,右室流出道间隔部起搏(RVOTS组)和右心室心尖部起搏(RVA组)各40例,观察两组在术中及术后的各项参数以及起搏心电图的QRS宽度。结果:两组患者均顺利完成手术,两组各1例术后发生电极脱位。全部手术无严重并发症出现。RVOTS组手术X线曝光时间明显延长(19.8±6.4 vs 10.3±4.8,P<0.01);术中心室的起搏阈值RVOTS组高于RVA组(0.61±0.23 vs 0.48±0.17,P<0.05),但术后1个月及3个月无统计学差异,两组间阻抗、感知在术中及术后无统计学差异,起搏心电图QRS波宽度无统计学差异。结论:主动电极在右室流出道间隔部起搏是安全和可行的。
