Benditt D G, Mianulli M, Fetter J, Milstein S, Buetikofer J, Molina E, Wibel F, Markowitz T
Department of Medicine (Cardiovascular Division) University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Am J Cardiol. 1989 Jul 1;64(1):27-32. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(89)90647-4.
Activity-triggered, rate-variable pacing systems offer a wide range of pacemaker patients the benefits of an appropriate paced chronotropic response. However, optimizing settings for these devices often entails treadmill exercise testing. To assess simpler procedures for predicting appropriate settings, pacing rates of "strapped-on" and implanted Activitrax pacemakers were evaluated during arm exercise, walk-in-place exercise and treadmill exercise (0% slope at 1.5, 2.0 and 3.0 mph). For exercise of similar duration, steady-state pacing rates of implanted devices during arm and walk-in-place exercise were lower than those achieved during treadmill exercise. Linear regression analysis resulted in the slope of these relations most closely approaching 1.0 for arm exercise at "low" activity threshold, while walk-in-place tended to result in slopes approaching 1.0 at all activity thresholds. Similarly, although strapped-on devices underestimated rates obtained with implanted devices, differences fell within a narrow range (-6 to -14%). Thus, in patients with implanted or strapped-on Activitrax pacemakers, relatively simple exercise procedures suitable for office or clinic environment may be useful to provide an estimate of pacing rates during physical activity, and may thereby facilitate selection of appropriate programmable settings.
活动触发、速率可变的起搏系统为众多起搏器患者带来了适当的变时性起搏反应的益处。然而,优化这些设备的设置通常需要进行跑步机运动测试。为了评估预测适当设置的更简单程序,在手臂运动、原地行走运动和跑步机运动(1.5、2.0和3.0英里/小时的0%坡度)期间,对“捆绑式”和植入式Activitrax起搏器的起搏速率进行了评估。对于持续时间相似的运动,手臂和原地行走运动期间植入设备的稳态起搏速率低于跑步机运动期间的速率。线性回归分析结果显示,在“低”活动阈值下,手臂运动时这些关系的斜率最接近1.0,而原地行走运动在所有活动阈值下的斜率都趋于接近1.0。同样,尽管捆绑式设备低估了植入式设备获得的速率,但差异在狭窄范围内(-6%至-14%)。因此,对于植入或佩戴Activitrax起搏器的患者,适合办公室或诊所环境的相对简单的运动程序可能有助于估计身体活动期间的起搏速率,从而便于选择合适的可编程设置。