Iuliano Assunta, Shopova Gergana, De Simone Antonio, Solimene Francesco, Turco Pietro, Marrazzo Natale, La Rocca Vincenzo, Ciardiello Carmine, Agrusta Marco, Stabile Giuseppe
Casa di Cura San Michele, Maddaloni (CE), Italy.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2007 Jan;30 Suppl 1:S47-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2007.00603.x.
Little is known regarding the long-term performance of coronary sinus (CS) leads, which have an effect on the longevity of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) systems.
This study included 109 patients (79 men) whose mean age was 68 +/- 9 years, New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class 3.2 +/- 0.5, and left ventricular ejection fraction 25.6 +/- 6.6%, and who underwent CRT (n = 45) or CRT-D (n = 64) systems implants for management of idiopathic (53%), ischemic (40%), or miscellaneous (7%) dilated cardiomyopathy. Unipolar (n = 57) or bipolar (n = 52) leads were placed into the CS venous system.
At implant, no significant difference was observed between unipolar and bipolar leads with respect to mean sensing performance (14 +/- 6 mV vs 14 +/- 8 mV, P = 0.97), pacing impedance (875 +/- 234 ohms vs 943 +/- 331 ohms, P = 0.24), and stimulation energy threshold (2 +/- 3.2 muJ vs 1.13 +/- 1.5 muJ, P = 0.08). At a median follow-up of 33 months, a significant decrease in stimulation impedance and increase in stimulation energy threshold was observed with unipolar (689 +/- 122 vs 875 +/- 234 ohms, P < 0.01, and 8.34 +/- 10.4 muJ vs 2 +/- 3.2 muJ, P < 0.001, respectively) as well as with bipolar (735 +/- 268 ohms vs 943 +/- 331 ohms, P < 0.01, and 4.81 +/- 9.92 vs 1.13 +/- 1.5 muJ, P = 0.02, respectively) leads. No significant difference in sensing performance was observed with either type of lead (10 +/- 5 mV vs 14 +/- 6 mV and 10 +/- 6 mV vs 14 +/- 8 mV, respectively). At long-term follow-up, no significant difference among any sensing or stimulation parameter was observed between unipolar and bipolar leads.
At long-term follow-up, a significant increase in the energy required for stimulation was observed, whereas sensing performance remained unchanged. The increase in energy capture threshold was less marked with bipolar than with unipolar leads.
关于冠状静脉窦(CS)导联的长期性能知之甚少,其对心脏再同步治疗(CRT)系统的使用寿命有影响。
本研究纳入了109例患者(79例男性),平均年龄68±9岁,纽约心脏协会(NYHA)心功能分级为3.2±0.5级,左心室射血分数为25.6±6.6%,这些患者因特发性(53%)、缺血性(40%)或其他(7%)扩张)扩张型心肌病接受了CRT(n = 45)或CRT-D(n = 64)系统植入。将单极(n = 57)或双极(n = 52)导联置入CS静脉系统。
植入时,单极和双极导联在平均感知性能(14±6 mV对14±8 mV,P = 0.97)、起搏阻抗(875±234欧姆对943±331欧姆,P = 0.24)和刺激能量阈值(2±3.2 μJ对1.13±1.5 μJ,P = 0.08)方面未观察到显著差异。在中位随访33个月时,单极导联(分别为689±122对875±234欧姆,P < 0.01,以及8.34±10.4 μJ对2±3.2 μJ,P < 0.001)和双极导联(分别为735±268欧姆对943±331欧姆,P < 0.01,以及4.81±9.92对1.13±1.5 μJ,P = 0.02)的刺激阻抗均显著降低,刺激能量阈值均显著升高。两种类型的导联在感知性能方面均未观察到显著差异(分别为10±5 mV对14±6 mV和10±6 mV对14±8 mV)。在长期随访中,单极和双极导联在任何感知或刺激参数方面均未观察到显著差异。
在长期随访中,观察到刺激所需能量显著增加,而感知性能保持不变。双极导联的能量捕获阈值增加幅度小于单极导联。