Suppr超能文献

在次极量运动时,房室同步起搏相比频率应答式起搏具有更优的心脏血流动力学:活动感知型DDDR起搏器的观察结果

Superior cardiac hemodynamics of atrioventricular synchrony over rate responsive pacing at submaximal exercise: observations in activity sensing DDDR pacemakers.

作者信息

Lau C P, Wong C K, Leung W H, Liu W X

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, University of Hong Kong.

出版信息

Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1990 Dec;13(12 Pt 2):1832-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1990.tb06899.x.

Abstract

The relative hemodynamic profile between dual chamber pacing (DDD) and activity sensing rate responsive pacing (VVIR) was compared in ten patients with dual chamber rate responsive pacemakers (Synergist II). With a double blind, randomized exercise protocol, DDDR pacemakers were programmed into VVI, VVIR, and DDD (AV interval 150 msec) modes and in seven patients the test in the DDD mode was repeated with the AV interval programmed at 75 msec. A treadmill exercise test of 6-minutes duration (2 stages, Stage I at 2 mph, 0% gradient and Stage II at 2 mph, 15% gradient) was performed at each of the programmed settings, with a rest period of 30 minutes in between tests. Cardiac output was assessed using continuous-wave Doppler sampling ascending aortic flow and expressed as a percentage of the value achieved during VVI pacing. During exercise, pacing rate between DDD and VVIR pacing was similar but was higher with DDD at the first minute of recovery (91 +/- 4 vs 81 +/- 3 beats/min, respectively). Cardiac output was significantly higher at rest, during low level exercise, and recovery with DDD pacing compared with VVIR pacing (resting: 21 +/- 14 vs -2 +/- 7%; Stage I: 36 +/- 6 vs 16 +/- 7%; Stage II: 25 +/- 15 vs 10 +/- 8%; recovery: 26 +/- 12 vs 4 +/- 9%; P less than 0.05 in all cases). Systolic blood pressure was significantly higher during low level of exercise in the DDD mode. Shortening of the AV interval to 75 msec did not significantly affect cardiac output during exercise, but cardiac output after exercise was reduced (2 +/- 6 vs 23 +/- 6% at an AV interval of 150 msec, P less than 0.02).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

摘要

在10例双腔频率应答起搏器(Synergist II)患者中,比较了双腔起搏(DDD)和活动感知频率应答起搏(VVIR)之间的相对血流动力学特征。采用双盲、随机运动方案,将DDDR起搏器程控为VVI、VVIR和DDD(房室间期150毫秒)模式,7例患者在房室间期程控为75毫秒时重复DDD模式下的测试。在每个程控设置下进行持续6分钟的跑步机运动测试(2个阶段,第一阶段速度为2英里/小时,坡度为0%,第二阶段速度为2英里/小时,坡度为15%),两次测试之间休息30分钟。使用连续波多普勒采样升主动脉血流评估心输出量,并表示为VVI起搏时所达到值的百分比。运动期间,DDD和VVIR起搏的起搏频率相似,但在恢复的第一分钟,DDD的频率更高(分别为91±4次/分钟和81±3次/分钟)。与VVIR起搏相比,DDD起搏时静息、低水平运动和恢复期间的心输出量显著更高(静息:21±14%对-2±7%;第一阶段:36±6%对16±7%;第二阶段:25±15%对10±8%;恢复:26±12%对4±9%;所有情况P均<0.05)。在低水平运动时,DDD模式下的收缩压显著更高。将房室间期缩短至75毫秒在运动期间对心输出量无显著影响,但运动后的心输出量降低(房室间期150毫秒时为2±6%对23±6%,P<0.02)。(摘要截断于250字)

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