Suppr超能文献

经皮左心室侧静脉穿刺失败患者的双焦点右心室心脏再同步治疗

Bifocal right ventricular cardiac resynchronization therapies in patients with unsuccessful percutaneous lateral left ventricular venous access.

作者信息

O'Donnell D, Nadurata V, Hamer A, Kertes P, Mohamed U

机构信息

Electrophysiology Unit, Austin Health, Studley Road, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.

出版信息

Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2005 Jan;28 Suppl 1:S27-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2005.00069.x.

Abstract

Biventricular cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with a lateral left ventricular (LV) lead cannot always be achieved. We report a single center experience of CRT utilizing a protocol that specifically required the implantation of a bifocal right ventricular (RV) lead system when lateral LV pacing could not be achieved. Consecutive candidates for CRT were included in the study. If strict criteria for lateral LV pacing were not met, they underwent implantation of a bifocal RV lead system with two 7F, active fixation leads, one placed septally at the apex, and the other in the high septal outflow tract. All patients were followed for 12 months and the two groups were compared. A biventricular (BiV) stimulation system was implanted in 44 patients, and a bifocal RV system in six. The demographic characteristics of the two groups were similar. Both groups experienced a similar improvement in functional capacity, increase in 6 minutes walking distance, and decreased need for hospitalizations. The mean increase in LV ejection fraction was 11% in the bifocal RV group versus 10% in the BiV group. Though the tissue Doppler indices of LV synchrony improved earlier in the BiV group, (19% vs 10%) the improvement was similar in both groups at 6 months (23% vs 20%). The clinical improvements conferred by CRT can be matched by a bifocal RV system in selected patients. This alternate approach should be considered when implantation of a LV lateral lead was unsuccessful.

摘要

左心室外侧导联的双心室心脏再同步治疗(CRT)并非总能实现。我们报告了一项单中心的CRT经验,该经验采用了一种方案,即在无法实现左心室外侧起搏时,专门要求植入双焦点右心室(RV)导联系统。连续的CRT候选者被纳入研究。如果不符合左心室外侧起搏的严格标准,他们将接受双焦点RV导联系统的植入,该系统由两根7F主动固定导联组成,一根置于心尖间隔处,另一根置于高位间隔流出道。所有患者均随访12个月并对两组进行比较。44例患者植入了双心室(BiV)刺激系统,6例植入了双焦点RV系统。两组的人口统计学特征相似。两组在功能能力改善、6分钟步行距离增加以及住院需求减少方面均有相似表现。双焦点RV组左心室射血分数的平均增加为11%,而BiV组为10%。虽然BiV组左心室同步性的组织多普勒指标改善更早(19%对10%),但两组在6个月时的改善相似(23%对20%)。在选定患者中,双焦点RV系统可带来与CRT相当的临床改善。当左心室外侧导联植入失败时,应考虑这种替代方法。

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