Bach J R, O'Connor K
New Jersey Medical School, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Newark.
J Am Paraplegia Soc. 1991 Jan;14(1):9-17. doi: 10.1080/01952307.1991.11735829.
Since 1972, radio-frequency electrophrenic nerve pacing (EPP) has been an option for assisting the ventilation of patients with chronic paralytic respiratory insufficiency. Most of the medical literature has been favorable regarding its continued application. We reviewed the literature to determine how "successful" application of EPP was defined. Our studies indicated that long-term follow-up of EPP patients has been generally inadequate with little emphasis placed on incidence and severity of complications. There was no standardization in defining successful experiences with EPP. Upper airway instability during pacing, lack of internal pacemaker alarms, and the risk of sudden pacemaker failure necessitate permanent tracheostomy in the great majority of patients but complications of the presence of a tracheostomy were not considered in evaluating the desirability of EPP. Some EPP patients became independent of any ventilatory support thus benefiting minimally from the time commitment, effort, and extreme expense needed for EPP placement and training. We conclude that EPP is a valid option for the properly screened patient but that expense, failure rate, morbidity and mortality remain excessive and that alternative methods of ventilatory support should be explored.
自1972年以来,射频膈神经起搏(EPP)一直是协助慢性麻痹性呼吸功能不全患者通气的一种选择。大多数医学文献都对其持续应用持肯定态度。我们回顾了文献,以确定EPP的“成功”应用是如何定义的。我们的研究表明,对EPP患者的长期随访普遍不足,很少关注并发症的发生率和严重程度。在定义EPP的成功经验方面没有标准化。起搏期间上呼吸道不稳定、缺乏内置起搏器警报以及起搏器突然故障的风险使得绝大多数患者需要永久性气管造口术,但在评估EPP的可取性时并未考虑气管造口术的并发症。一些EPP患者不再依赖任何通气支持,因此从EPP置入和培训所需的时间投入、精力和高昂费用中获益甚微。我们得出结论,EPP对于经过适当筛选的患者是一种有效的选择,但费用、故障率、发病率和死亡率仍然过高,应探索其他通气支持方法。