Suppr超能文献

临时心外膜起搏导线:位置和电极类型的意义

Temporary epicardial pacemaker wires: significance of position and electrode type.

作者信息

Aser Raed, Orhan Coskun, Niemann Bernd, Roth Peter, Perepelitsa Andre, Attmann Tim, Böning Andreas

机构信息

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Giessen, Giessen, Germany.

出版信息

Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 Feb;62(1):66-9. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1311544. Epub 2012 Oct 3.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine the pacing and sensing properties of different temporary epicardial pacemaker electrodes after cardiac surgery depending on position at the heart and time after surgery.

METHODS

From September 2009 to October 2010, 60 patients undergoing cardiac surgery were prospectively randomized into two groups: group O: Osypka-electrodes (n = 30), group M: Medtronic-electrodes (n = 30). In position 1, the bipolar electrodes were inserted onto the anterior wall of the right ventricle and at the right atrial auricle, in position 2, onto the diaphragmal wall of the right ventricle and at the aortic aspect of the superior vena cava medial close to the atrium. Sensing values and pacing thresholds were measured for all electrodes during surgery, on day 1 and every second day up to day 10 after surgery.

RESULTS

In both groups, pacing thresholds (both positions) were higher during surgery (ventricle 3.1 ± 0.6 V, atrium 3.1 ± 0.3 V) than at day 1 (ventricle 2.4 ± 0.7 V, atrium 2.4 ± 0.3 V) and increased during the perioperative course until day 10 (ventricle 4.7 ± 1.0 V, atrium 4.9 ± 1.1 V, p = 0.04, p = 0.02). P and R wave amplitudes did not change over time (atrium 5.1 ± 0.1 mV initially, 4.2 ± 0.1 mV at removal (p = ns); ventricle 10.4 ± 0.2 mV vs. 10.1 ± 0.25 mV). Group M had better median pacing thresholds compared with group O (atrium: 2.9 ± 0.6 V vs. 3.9 ± 0.7 V, p = 0.04 and ventricle: 2.6 ± 0.6 V vs. 3.9 ± 0.6 V, p = 0.045). Atrial position 1 was superior to position 2 concerning pacing thresholds of Medtronic electrodes (2.1 ± 0.3 mV vs. 3.4 ± 0.4 mV, p = 0.02). Osypka-electrodes were easier to handle due to their more pliable texture.

CONCLUSIONS

  1. Up to postoperative day 10, adequate pacing and sensing performance was achieved by both electrode types in each position. 2. Medtronic electrodes had better pacing thresholds in atrium and ventricle after day 5. 3. Positioning of pacemaker electrodes does not alter functionality. 4. Handling of Osypka electrodes was easier than that of Medtronic electrodes.
摘要

目的

根据心脏手术后不同临时心外膜起搏电极在心脏的位置及术后时间,确定其起搏和感知特性。

方法

2009年9月至2010年10月,60例行心脏手术的患者被前瞻性随机分为两组:O组:奥西普卡电极(n = 30),M组:美敦力电极(n = 30)。在位置1,将双极电极插入右心室前壁和右心耳;在位置2,插入右心室膈面壁以及靠近心房处上腔静脉内侧的主动脉侧。在手术期间、术后第1天以及术后第10天之前每隔一天测量所有电极的感知值和起搏阈值。

结果

两组中,手术期间(心室3.1±0.6V,心房3.1±0.3V)的起搏阈值均高于术后第1天(心室2.4±0.7V,心房2.4±0.3V),并在围手术期过程中直至第10天有所升高(心室4.7±1.0V,心房4.9±1.1V,p = 0.04,p = 0.02)。P波和R波振幅随时间无变化(心房最初5.1±0.1mV,拔除时4.2±0.1mV(p = 无统计学意义);心室10.4±0.2mV对10.1±0.25mV)。与O组相比,M组的起搏阈值中位数更好(心房:2.9±0.6V对3.9±0.7V,p = 0.04;心室:2.6±0.6V对3.9±0.6V,p = 0.045)。就美敦力电极的起搏阈值而言,心房位置1优于位置2(2.1±0.3mV对3.4±0.4mV,p = 0.02)。奥西普卡电极质地更柔韧,更易于操作。

结论

  1. 直至术后第10天,每种位置的两种电极类型均实现了足够的起搏和感知性能。2. 术后第5天之后,美敦力电极在心房和心室的起搏阈值更好。3. 起搏电极的定位不改变功能。4. 奥西普卡电极比美敦力电极更易于操作。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验