Mateos Juan Carlos Pachón, Mateos José Carlos Pachón, Vargas Remy Nelson Albornoz, Mateos Enrique Indalécio Pachón, Cosac Khalil, Lopes Hugo Belloti, Soares Fabrizio Achilles, Sousa Amanda Guerra Moraes Rego
Instituto Dante Pazzanese de Cardiologia, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc. 2012 Apr-Jun;27(2):195-202. doi: 10.5935/1678-9741.20120055.
The conventional right ventricle (RV) endocardial pacing leads QRS widening and desynchronization myocardial compromising ventricular function. With the need for stimulation less deleterious, RV septal pacing has been used more. Eventually have been reported higher thresholds and smaller R waves in the septal stimulation.
To compare the parameters of the septal and apical stimulation, intra-patient, if there are any differences that may affect the choice of the point of stimulation.
A prospective controlled study. We included 25 patients, 67.2±9 years, 10 (40%) women with indications for pacemaker for bradyarrhythmias. Etiologies were degenerative in nine (36%), Coronary disease in eight (32%), Chagas disease in seven (28%), and valve disease in one (4%) patient. Electrodes were active fixation and assessed the thresholds of command, impedance and R wave in uniand bipolar implant and after six months.
The average acute threshold command, R wave and impedance unipolar / bipolar septais x apicais were respectively 0.73 x 0.73V and 0,74V x 0,78V; 10 x 9,9mV and 12,3 x 12,4mV; 579 x 621Ω and 611 x 629Ω. Comparisons between parameters with septal and apical two-tailed paired t-test showed a P > 0.1. After six months, the mean control thresholds, R wave impedances and unipolar/bipolar septais x apicais were respectively 0.5V x 0 72V and 0.71V x 0,87V; 11.4 x 9,5mV and 12x11,2mV; 423x426 Ω and 578x550 Ω, with P > 0.05, except compared to unipolar pacing threshold septal apical unipolar P 0.02.
Using intra-patient comparisons, no significant differences between electrophysiological parameters septal and apical pacing and there are no restrictions for choosing the right ventricular septal pacing.
传统的右心室(RV)心内膜起搏导线会使QRS波增宽和心肌失同步,损害心室功能。由于需要刺激性较小的起搏方式,右心室间隔起搏的应用更为广泛。最终有报道称间隔刺激的阈值更高且R波更小。
在同一患者体内比较间隔起搏和心尖起搏的参数,看是否存在可能影响起搏点选择的差异。
一项前瞻性对照研究。我们纳入了25例患者,年龄67.2±9岁,10例(40%)女性,因缓慢性心律失常有起搏器植入指征。病因包括9例(36%)退行性病变、8例(32%)冠心病、7例(28%)恰加斯病和1例(4%)瓣膜病患者。电极采用主动固定,在单极和双极植入时以及六个月后评估起搏阈值、阻抗和R波。
单极/双极间隔起搏与心尖起搏的平均急性起搏阈值、R波和阻抗分别为0.73×0.73V和0.74V×0.78V;10×9.9mV和12.3×12.4mV;579×621Ω和611×629Ω。间隔起搏和心尖起搏参数之间的双尾配对t检验显示P>0.1。六个月后,单极/双极间隔起搏与心尖起搏的平均控制阈值、R波阻抗分别为0.5V×0.72V和0.71V×0.87V;11.4×9.5mV和12×11.2mV;423×426Ω和578×550Ω,P>0.05,但单极间隔起搏阈值与心尖单极起搏阈值比较P=0.02。
通过同一患者体内比较,间隔起搏和心尖起搏的电生理参数无显著差异,右心室间隔起搏的选择没有限制。