Division of Cardiovascular Medicine and Center for Biomedical Informatics Research, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Circ Heart Fail. 2010 May;3(3):395-404. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.109.900076. Epub 2010 Feb 22.
Cardiac resynchronization therapy improves morbidity and mortality in appropriately selected patients. Whether atrioventricular (AV) and interventricular (VV) pacing interval optimization confers further clinical improvement remains unclear. A variety of techniques are used to estimate optimum AV/VV intervals; however, the precision of their estimates and the ramifications of an imprecise estimate have not been characterized previously.
An objective methodology for quantifying the precision of estimated optimum AV/VV intervals was developed, allowing physiologic effects to be distinguished from measurement variability. Optimization using multiple conventional techniques was conducted in individual sessions with 20 patients. Measures of stroke volume and dyssynchrony were obtained using impedance cardiography and echocardiographic methods, specifically, aortic velocity-time integral, mitral velocity-time integral, A-wave truncation, and septal-posterior wall motion delay. Echocardiographic methods yielded statistically insignificant data in the majority of patients (62%-82%). In contrast, impedance cardiography yielded statistically significant results in 84% and 75% of patients for AV and VV interval optimization, respectively. Individual cases demonstrated that accepting a plausible but statistically insignificant estimated optimum AV or VV interval can result in worse cardiac function than default values.
Consideration of statistical significance is critical for validating clinical optimization data in individual patients and for comparing competing optimization techniques. Accepting an estimated optimum without knowledge of its precision can result in worse cardiac function than default settings and a misinterpretation of observed changes over time. In this study, only impedance cardiography yielded statistically significant AV and VV interval optimization data in the majority of patients.
心脏再同步治疗可改善适当选择的患者的发病率和死亡率。房室(AV)和室间(VV)起搏间期优化是否能进一步改善临床结果尚不清楚。有多种技术用于估计最佳 AV/VV 间期;然而,其估计的精度及其不准确估计的后果以前尚未确定。
开发了一种客观的方法来量化估计最佳 AV/VV 间期的精度,从而可以区分生理效应和测量变异性。在 20 名患者的单独治疗中使用多种常规技术进行优化。使用阻抗心动图和超声心动图方法(具体为主动脉速度时间积分、二尖瓣速度时间积分、A 波截断和室间隔-后壁运动延迟)获得每搏量和不同步的度量。在大多数患者(62%-82%)中,超声心动图方法得出的是无统计学意义的数据。相比之下,阻抗心动图分别在 84%和 75%的患者中得出 AV 和 VV 间期优化的具有统计学意义的结果。个别病例表明,接受合理但无统计学意义的估计最佳 AV 或 VV 间期可能导致心脏功能比默认值更差。
在个体患者中验证临床优化数据和比较竞争优化技术时,考虑统计学意义至关重要。在不知道其精度的情况下接受估计的最佳值可能会导致比默认设置更差的心脏功能,并对随时间观察到的变化产生误解。在这项研究中,只有阻抗心动图在大多数患者中得出了具有统计学意义的 AV 和 VV 间期优化数据。