Suppr超能文献

心内科医生是否遵循欧洲心脏起搏和再同步治疗指南?欧洲心律协会调查结果。

Do cardiologists follow the European guidelines for cardiac pacing and resynchronization therapy? Results of the European Heart Rhythm Association survey.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Institution of Medical Science, Uppsala University, Uppsala 75185, Sweden

Second Cardiology Department, Attikon University Hospital, University of Athens, Rimini 1, Haidari Athens 12462, Greece.

出版信息

Europace. 2015 Jan;17(1):148-51. doi: 10.1093/europace/euu395.

Abstract

The purpose of this European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) EP wire survey was to evaluate the implementation of the current guidelines for cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in Europe. A total of 48 centres replied to the survey, 34 of them (71%) were university hospitals. All responding centres implement CRT in patients with classical indications, i.e. sinus rhythm, New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II, III, or ambulatory IV, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 35%, and left bundle-branch block (LBBB) with QRS duration >150 ms, while 31 centres (67%) would implant a CRT device in patients with the same characteristics but with a non-LBBB pattern. Forty-one centres (89%) would also implant CRT in patients with sinus rhythm, NYHA Class II, III, or ambulatory IV, LVEF <35%, and LBBB with QRS duration between 120 and 150 ms, while only eight centres (17%) would implant the device in patients with the same characteristics but with a non-LBBB pattern. In patients with LVEF <35% and QRS duration below 120 ms, the majority of the centres (80%) would implant a single- or dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, but in nine cases (20%) no device was considered to be indicated. The results of this survey showed a good adherence to some of the current recommendations. Still some reluctance exists when offering the device therapy to patients with QRS duration in the lower range.

摘要

这项欧洲心律协会(EHRA)EP 导丝调查的目的是评估当前心脏起搏和心脏再同步治疗(CRT)指南在欧洲的实施情况。共有 48 个中心对该调查做出了回应,其中 34 个(71%)是大学医院。所有参与调查的中心都在具有经典适应证的患者中实施 CRT,即窦性节律、纽约心脏协会(NYHA)功能分级 II、III 或 IV 级,左心室射血分数(LVEF)为 35%,左束支传导阻滞(LBBB)伴 QRS 时限>150ms,而 31 个中心(67%)也会在具有相同特征但非 LBBB 形态的患者中植入 CRT 设备。41 个中心(89%)也会在窦性节律、NYHA 分级 II、III 或 IV 级,LVEF <35%,LBBB 伴 QRS 时限在 120 至 150ms 之间的患者中植入 CRT,但只有 8 个中心(17%)会在具有相同特征但非 LBBB 形态的患者中植入该设备。对于 LVEF <35%且 QRS 时限低于 120ms 的患者,大多数中心(80%)会植入单腔或双腔植入式心脏复律除颤器,但有 9 个中心(20%)认为不需要植入设备。该调查结果显示,一些现行建议得到了很好的遵守,但在为 QRS 时限处于较低范围的患者提供设备治疗时,仍然存在一些抵触情绪。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验