Pürerfellner Helmut, Brandt Johan, Israel Carsten, Sheldon Todd, Johnson James, Tscheliessnigg Karlheinz, Sperzel Johannes, Boriani Giuseppe, Puglisi Andrea, Milasinovic Goran
Krankenhaus der Elisabethinen, Academic Teaching Hospital, Linz, Austria.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2008 Feb;31(2):167-76. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2007.00965.x.
Managed Ventricular Pacing (MVP) and Search AV+ (SAV+) are two pacing algorithms designed to reduce ventricular pacing. MVP promotes conduction by operating in AAI/R mode with backup ventricular pacing during atrioventricular block (AVB). SAV+ operates in DDD/R mode with a nominal AV extension of 290 ms during atrial sensing and 320 ms during atrial pacing. The reduction in ventricular pacing was compared with these two algorithms in pacemaker patients.
The EnRhythm and EnPulse clinical studies assessed the percentage of ventricular pacing (%VP) after 1 month. Each patient's AVB status was assigned using the following hierarchical categories: persistent third-degree AVB (p3AVB), episodic third-degree AVB (e3AVB), second-degree AVB (2AVB), first-degree AVB (1AVB), and no AVB (nAVB). The%VP was tabulated for each AVB status category.
Data were available from 322 patients of whom 129 received DDD(R) pacing with the MVP algorithm activated and 193 patients with DDD(R) pacing and the SAV+ function activated, each for a month period. MVP resulted in a significantly lower median%VP than SAV+ in all AVB categories except for p3AVB: nAVB (0.3 vs 2.9, P < 0.0001), 1AVB (0.9% vs 80.6%, P < 0.0001), 2AVB (37.6 vs 99.3, P< 0.002), e3AVB (1.2 vs 42.2, P = 0.02), p3AVB (98.9 vs 100, P = 1.00).
MVP resulted in a greater reduction in%VP than SAV+ across all patient groups except persistent third-degree AV block. The greatest reduction in%VP was observed in patients with mildly impaired AV conduction.
生理性心室起搏(MVP)和搜索房室+(SAV+)是两种旨在减少心室起搏的起搏算法。MVP通过在房室传导阻滞(AVB)期间以AAI/R模式运行并辅以心室起搏来促进传导。SAV+在DDD/R模式下运行,心房感知时的标称房室间期延长为290毫秒,心房起搏时为320毫秒。在起搏器植入患者中比较了这两种算法在减少心室起搏方面的效果。
EnRhythm和EnPulse临床研究评估了1个月后心室起搏百分比(%VP)。使用以下分级类别确定每位患者的AVB状态:持续性三度AVB(p3AVB)、间歇性三度AVB(e3AVB)、二度AVB(2AVB)、一度AVB(1AVB)和无AVB(nAVB)。列出每个AVB状态类别的%VP。
共有322例患者的数据可供分析,其中129例接受激活MVP算法的DDD(R)起搏,193例接受激活SAV+功能的DDD(R)起搏,均为期1个月。除p3AVB外,在所有AVB类别中,MVP导致的%VP中位数均显著低于SAV+:nAVB(0.3%对2.9%,P<0.0001)、1AVB(0.9%对80.6%,P<0.0001)、2AVB(37.6%对99.3%,P<0.002)、e3AVB(1.2%对42.2%,P = 0.02)、p3AVB(98.9%对100%,P = 1.00)。
除持续性三度房室传导阻滞外,在所有患者组中,MVP导致的%VP降低幅度均大于SAV+。在房室传导轻度受损的患者中观察到%VP降低幅度最大。