Stockburger M, Gerhardt L, Helms S, Schlegl M, Butter C
Charité-Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Department of Cardiology, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol. 2007 Dec;18(4):250-8. doi: 10.1007/s00399-007-0582-9.
Bifocal right atrial pacing (BP) has been reported to increase arrhythmia-free intervals in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) under antiarrhythmic drugs. This study compares AF burden with unifocal pacing (UP) vs BP under sotalol.
In 19 patients with PAF a DDDR pacemaker with right atrial lateral and CS ostial leads was implanted. Sotalol was initiated. After a 3 month back-up pacing period patients were randomized to continuous UP or BP for 3 months and crossed over for 3 more months. Primary endpoint was AF burden. Secondary endpoints included number of episodes, time to first recurrence and safety of BP.
The intention to treat analysis revealed 12.4% AF during back-up, 6.2% during UP and BP (p=0.91 UP vs BP, p=0.08 back-up vs UP and p=0.07 back-up vs BP). Per protocol analysis showed no advantage of either pacing mode (UP 4.8% and BP 5.4% AF, p=0.64). Overdrive pacing reduced AF burden to 6.2 vs 8.8% during back-up (p=0.09). Septal lead dislodgement occurred in 3 patients.
Atrial pacing tends to reduce AF burden in patients with PAF under sotalol. An incremental effect of BP vs UP cannot be confirmed. BP may be complicated by elevated lead dislodgement rates.
据报道,在使用抗心律失常药物的情况下,双焦点右心房起搏(BP)可增加阵发性心房颤动(PAF)患者的无心律失常间期。本研究比较了索他洛尔治疗下,单焦点起搏(UP)与BP的房颤负荷。
对19例PAF患者植入带有右心房外侧和冠状窦口导联的DDDR起搏器。开始使用索他洛尔。在3个月的备用起搏期后,患者被随机分为持续UP或BP组,为期3个月,然后交叉再进行3个月。主要终点是房颤负荷。次要终点包括发作次数、首次复发时间和BP的安全性。
意向性分析显示,备用起搏期间房颤发生率为12.4%,UP和BP期间为6.2%(UP与BP相比,p = 0.91;备用起搏与UP相比,p = 0.08;备用起搏与BP相比,p = 0.07)。符合方案分析显示两种起搏模式均无优势(UP时房颤发生率为4.8%,BP时为5.4%,p = 0.64)。超速起搏将备用起搏期间的房颤负荷降至6.2%,而之前为8.8%(p = 0.09)。3例患者发生间隔导联脱位。
在索他洛尔治疗下,心房起搏倾向于降低PAF患者的房颤负荷。无法证实BP相对于UP有增加的效果。BP可能因导联脱位率升高而出现并发症。