Suppr超能文献

使用目前用于心室除颤的导线时,电极配置和电容器大小对心房内部除颤阈值的影响。

Effect of electrode configuration and capacitor size on internal atrial defibrillation threshold using leads currently used for ventricular defibrillation.

作者信息

Neri R, Palermo P, Cesario A S, Baragli D, Amici E, Laudadio M T, De Rosa A, DeSeta F, Mongeon L, Gambelli G

机构信息

Division of Cardiology G B Grassi Hospital, Rome, Italy.

出版信息

J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 1999 Jul;3(2):149-53. doi: 10.1023/a:1009821514753.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown that endocardial atrial defibrillation, using lead configurations specifically designed for ventricular defibrillation, is feasible but the substantial patient discomfort might prevent the widespread use of the technique unless significant improvements in shock tolerability are achieved. It has been suggested that the peak voltage or the peak current but not the total energy delivered determines the patient pain perception and therefore, lower defibrillating voltage and current achieved with modifications in lead and waveforms may increase shock tolerability. This study was undertaken to evaluate the effect, on the atrial defibrillation threshold (ADFT), of the addition of a patch electrode (mimicking the can electrode) to the right ventricle (RV)-superior vena cava (SVC) lead configuration. The influence of capacitor size on ADFT using the RV-SVC+skin patch configuration was also assessed.

METHODS

In 10 patients (pts) (Group 1) cardioversion thresholds were evaluated using biphasic shocks in two different configurations: 1) right ventricle (RV) to superior vena cava (SVC); 2) RV to SVC+skin patch. In a second group of twelve patients (Group 2) atrial defibrillation thresholds of biphasic waveforms that differed with the total capacitance (90 or 170 microF) were assessed using the RV to SVC+skin patch configuration.

RESULTS

In Group 1 AF was terminated in 10/10 pts (100 %) with both configurations. There was no significant difference in delivered energy at the defibrillation threshold between the two configurations (7.1 +/- 5.1 J vs 7.1 +/- 2.6 J; p < 0.05). In group 2 AF was terminated in 12/12 pts (100%) with both waveforms. The 170 microF waveform provided a significantly lower defibrillating voltage (323.7 +/- 74.6 V vs 380 +/- 70.2 V; p < 0.03) and current (8.1 +/- 2.7 A vs 10.0 +/- 2.3 A; p < 0.04) than the 90 microF waveform. All pts, in both groups, perceived the shock of the lowest energy tested (180 V) as painful or uncomfortable.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of a patch electrode to the RV-SVC lead configuration does not reduce the ADFT. Shocks from larger capacitors defibrillate with lower voltage and current but pts still perceive low energy subthreshold shocks as painful or uncomfortable.

摘要

背景

先前的研究表明,使用专门为心室除颤设计的导联配置进行心内膜心房除颤是可行的,但患者会有明显不适,除非在休克耐受性方面取得显著改善,否则可能会阻碍该技术的广泛应用。有人提出,决定患者疼痛感知的是峰值电压或峰值电流,而非输送的总能量,因此,通过改变导联和波形来降低除颤电压和电流,可能会提高休克耐受性。本研究旨在评估在右心室(RV)-上腔静脉(SVC)导联配置中添加贴片电极(模拟罐电极)对心房除颤阈值(ADFT)的影响。还评估了使用RV-SVC+皮肤贴片配置时,电容器大小对ADFT的影响。

方法

在10例患者(第1组)中,使用两种不同配置的双相电击评估转复阈值:1)右心室(RV)至上腔静脉(SVC);2)RV至SVC+皮肤贴片。在第二组12例患者(第2组)中,使用RV至SVC+皮肤贴片配置评估总电容不同(90或170微法)的双相波形的心房除颤阈值。

结果

在第1组中,两种配置下10/10例患者(100%)的房颤均终止。两种配置在除颤阈值时输送的能量无显著差异(7.1±5.1焦耳对7.1±2.6焦耳;p<0.05)。在第2组中,两种波形下12/12例患者(100%)的房颤均终止。170微法波形的除颤电压(323.7±74.6伏对380±70.2伏;p<0.03)和电流(8.1±2.7安对10.0±2.3安;p<0.04)均显著低于90微法波形。两组所有患者都认为测试的最低能量(180伏)电击会引起疼痛或不适。

结论

在RV-SVC导联配置中添加贴片电极不会降低ADFT。较大电容器产生的电击以较低电压和电流除颤,但患者仍会感到低能量亚阈值电击疼痛或不适。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验