Doshi Rahul N, Daoud Emile G, Fellows Christopher, Turk Kyong, Duran Aurelio, Hamdan Mohamed H, Pires Luis A
Cardiovascular Consultants of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada 89074, USA.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2005 Nov;16(11):1160-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2005.50062.x.
Chronic right ventricular pacing has been reported to promote cardiac dyssynchrony. The PAVE trial prospectively compared chronic biventricular pacing to right ventricular pacing in patients undergoing ablation of the AV node for management of atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular rates.
One hundred and eighty-four patients requiring AV node ablation were randomized to receive a biventricular pacing system (n = 103) or a right ventricular pacing system (n = 81). The study endpoints were change in the 6-minute hallway walk test, quality of life, and left ventricular ejection fraction. Patient characteristics were similar (64% male; age: 69 +/- 10 years, ejection fraction: 0.46 +/- 0.16; 83%, NYHA Class II or III). At 6 months postablation, patients treated with cardiac resynchronization had a significant improvement in 6-minute walk distance, (31%) above baseline (82.9 +/- 94.7 m), compared to patients receiving right ventricular pacing, (24%) above baseline (61.2 +/- 90.0 m) (P = 0.04). There were no significant differences in the quality-of-life parameters. At 6 months postablation, the ejection fraction in the biventricular group (0.46 +/- 0.13) was significantly greater in comparison to patients receiving right ventricular pacing (0.41 +/- 0.13, P = 0.03). Patients with an ejection fraction <or=45% or with NYHA Class II/III symptoms receiving a biventricular pacemaker appear to have a greater improvement in 6-minute walk distance compared to patients with normal systolic function or Class I symptoms.
For patients undergoing AV node ablation for atrial fibrillation, biventricular pacing provides a significant improvement in the 6-minute hallway walk test and ejection fraction compared to right ventricular pacing. These beneficial effects of cardiac resynchronization appear to be greater in patients with impaired systolic function or with symptomatic heart failure.
据报道,慢性右心室起搏会促进心脏不同步。PAVE试验前瞻性地比较了在因快速心室率房颤而接受房室结消融治疗的患者中,慢性双心室起搏与右心室起搏的效果。
184例需要进行房室结消融的患者被随机分为接受双心室起搏系统组(n = 103)或右心室起搏系统组(n = 81)。研究终点为6分钟走廊步行试验的变化、生活质量和左心室射血分数。患者特征相似(64%为男性;年龄:69±10岁,射血分数:0.46±0.16;83%为纽约心脏协会II级或III级)。在消融后6个月,接受心脏再同步治疗的患者6分钟步行距离较基线有显著改善(提高31%,82.9±94.7米),而接受右心室起搏的患者较基线提高24%(61.2±90.0米)(P = 0.04)。生活质量参数无显著差异。在消融后6个月,双心室组的射血分数(0.46±0.13)明显高于接受右心室起搏的患者(0.41±0.13,P = 0.03)。与收缩功能正常或I级症状的患者相比,射血分数≤45%或有纽约心脏协会II/III级症状且接受双心室起搏器治疗的患者,6分钟步行距离改善似乎更大。
对于因房颤接受房室结消融的患者,与右心室起搏相比,双心室起搏在6分钟走廊步行试验和射血分数方面有显著改善。心脏再同步治疗的这些有益效果在收缩功能受损或有症状性心力衰竭的患者中似乎更大。