de Voogt Willem G, van Mechelen Rob, van den Bos Arjan A, Scheffer Mike, van Hemel Norbert M, Levine Paul A
St. Lucas Andreas Ziekenhuis, 1061 AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Europace. 2005 Jan;7(1):60-6. doi: 10.1016/j.eupc.2004.10.001.
The study was designed to compare the electrical characteristics of atrial leads placed in the low atrial septum (LAS) with those placed in the right atrial appendage (RAA) associated with dual chamber pacing.
In 86 patients an active-fixation (St. Jude Medical's Tendril DX model 1388T) atrial lead was positioned in RAA and in 86 patients the same model atrial lead was placed in the LAS. Pacing thresholds, sensing thresholds, impedances and the Far Field paced R-Wave (FFRW) amplitude and timing were compared at 6 weeks and at 3 and 6 months.
The pacing threshold did not differ between groups. Sensed voltage of the P-wave was higher in the LAS compared with the RAA at 3 and 6 months (P=0.004). Impedance was higher in the LAS at 6 weeks and 3 months (P=0.002) but this difference was no longer significant at 6 months (P=0.05). The atrial sensed FFRW voltage was significantly higher in the LAS position compared with the RAA at 3 and 6 months follow-up (P=0.0002). FFRW voltage>1 mV was seen in 87% of the RAA pacing group and in 94% of the LAS pacing group (P=ns). The time between the ventricular pacing stimulus and the sensed FFRW in the atrium, (V spike-FFRW) in RAA was longer than in LAS at all follow-up measurements (P=0.006).
The electrical characteristics of LAS pacing makes this alternative position in the atrium safe and feasible. Though statistical differences were found in P-wave sensing (LAS higher voltage than in the RAA) and FFRW sensing was higher in the LAS compared with the RAA this did not interfere with the clinical applicability of the LAS as alternative pacing site.
本研究旨在比较置于低位房间隔(LAS)的心房电极与置于右心耳(RAA)且与双腔起搏相关的心房电极的电学特性。
86例患者中,将主动固定型(圣犹达医疗公司的Tendril DX 1388T型号)心房电极置于RAA,另外86例患者将同一型号的心房电极置于LAS。在6周以及3个月和6个月时比较起搏阈值、感知阈值、阻抗以及远场起搏R波(FFRW)的幅度和时限。
两组之间起搏阈值无差异。在3个月和6个月时,LAS处P波的感知电压高于RAA处(P = 0.004)。在6周和3个月时,LAS处的阻抗较高(P = 0.002),但在6个月时这种差异不再显著(P = 0.05)。在3个月和6个月随访时,LAS位置处心房感知的FFRW电压显著高于RAA处(P = 0.0002)。在RAA起搏组中87%以及LAS起搏组中94%可见FFRW电压>1 mV(P = 无显著性差异)。在所有随访测量中,RAA处心室起搏刺激与心房感知的FFRW之间的时间(V波峰 - FFRW)长于LAS处(P = 0.006)。
LAS起搏的电学特性使得心房的这一替代位置安全可行。尽管在P波感知方面发现有统计学差异(LAS处电压高于RAA处),并且与RAA相比LAS处FFRW感知更高,但这并不影响LAS作为替代起搏部位的临床适用性。