Link Mark S, Hellkamp Anne S, Estes N A Mark, Orav E John, Ellenbogen Kenneth A, Ibrahim Bassiema, Greenspon Arnold, Rizo-Patron Carlos, Goldman Lee, Lee Kerry L, Lamas Gervasio A
Tufts-New England Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts 02111, USA.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004 Jun 2;43(11):2066-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2003.10.072.
We evaluated the incidence, predictors, and treatment of pacemaker syndrome in patients with sinus node dysfunction treated with ventricular-based (VVIR) pacing in the Mode Selection Trial (MOST).
Pacemaker syndrome, or intolerance to VVIR pacing, consists of cardiovascular signs and symptoms induced by VVIR pacing.
The definition of pacemaker syndrome required that a patient with single-chamber VVIR pacing develop either congestive signs and symptoms associated with retrograde conduction during VVIR pacing or a >or=20 mm Hg reduction of systolic blood pressure during VVIR pacing, associated with reproducible symptoms of weakness, lightheadedness, or syncope.
Of 996 patients randomized to VVIR pacing, 182 (18.3%) met criteria for pacemaker syndrome in follow-up. Pacemaker syndrome occurred early in most patients (13.8% at 6 months, 16.0% at 1 year, increasing to 19.7% at 4 years). Baseline univariate predictors of pacemaker syndrome included a lower sinus rate and higher programmed pacemaker rate. Previous heart failure, ejection fraction, and drop in systolic blood pressure with VVIR pacing at implantation did not predict the development of pacemaker syndrome. Post-implantation predictors of pacemaker syndrome were a higher percentage of paced beats, higher programmed low rate, and slower underlying spontaneous sinus rate. Quality of life decreased at the time of diagnosis of pacemaker syndrome and improved with reprogramming to atrial-based pacing.
Severe pacemaker syndrome developed in nearly 20% of VVIR-paced patients and improved with reprogramming to the dual-chamber pacing mode. Because prediction of pacemaker syndrome is difficult, the only way to prevent pacemaker syndrome is to implant atrial-based pacemakers in all patients.
在模式选择试验(MOST)中,我们评估了采用心室按需起搏(VVIR)治疗的窦房结功能障碍患者起搏器综合征的发生率、预测因素及治疗情况。
起搏器综合征,即对VVIR起搏不耐受,由VVIR起搏诱发的心血管体征和症状组成。
起搏器综合征的定义要求单腔VVIR起搏患者在VVIR起搏期间出现与逆行传导相关的充血性体征和症状,或在VVIR起搏期间收缩压下降≥20 mmHg,并伴有可重复出现的虚弱、头晕或晕厥症状。
在随机接受VVIR起搏的996例患者中,有182例(18.3%)在随访中符合起搏器综合征标准。大多数患者起搏器综合征出现较早(6个月时为13.8%,1年时为16.0%,4年时增至19.7%)。起搏器综合征的基线单因素预测因素包括较低的窦性心率和较高的起搏器程控频率。既往心力衰竭、射血分数以及植入时VVIR起搏时收缩压下降情况并不能预测起搏器综合征的发生。植入后起搏器综合征的预测因素为较高的起搏百分比、较高的程控低频率以及较慢的基础自发窦性心率。起搏器综合征诊断时生活质量下降,重新程控为心房起搏后生活质量改善。
近20%接受VVIR起搏的患者发生了严重的起搏器综合征,重新程控为双腔起搏模式后病情改善。由于难以预测起搏器综合征,预防起搏器综合征的唯一方法是为所有患者植入心房起搏器。