Suppr超能文献

右心室间隔部或希氏束起搏与右心室心尖部起搏对心功能的影响:一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析

Effects of right ventricular septum or His-bundle pacing versus right ventricular apical pacing on cardiac function: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

作者信息

Zhuang Lingfang, Mao Ye, Wu Liqun, Niu Wenquan, Chen Kang

机构信息

1 Department of Cardiology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.

2 Outpatient Department, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.

出版信息

J Int Med Res. 2018 Sep;46(9):3848-3860. doi: 10.1177/0300060518781415. Epub 2018 Jul 1.

Abstract

Objective Recent studies have demonstrated that right ventricular apical (RVA) pacing has a deleterious impact on left ventricular function, while right ventricular septum (RVS) or His-bundle pacing (HBP) contribute to improvements in cardiac function. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to compare the mid- and long-term effects of RVS and HB pacing versus RVA pacing on cardiac function. Methods Eligible RCTs were identified by systematically searching the electronic literature databases PubMed®, Cochrane Library, Embase® and Ovid®. Results Seventeen articles ( n = 1290 patients) were included in this meta-analysis, including 14 studies comparing the effects of RVA and RVS pacing on cardiac function and three studies comparing HBP with pacing at other sites. Compared with RVA pacing, RVS or HBP exhibited a higher left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (weighted mean difference 3.28; 95% confidence interval 1.45, 5.12) at the end of follow-up. Conclusions RVS pacing exhibited a higher LVEF after long-term follow-up than RVA pacing. RVS pacing could replace the previously used RVA pacing as a better alternative with improved clinical outcomes. However, there remains a need for larger RCTs to compare the safety and efficacy of RVS with RVA pacing.

摘要

目的 近期研究表明,右心室心尖部(RVA)起搏对左心室功能有不良影响,而右心室间隔部(RVS)或希氏束起搏(HBP)有助于改善心功能。进行一项随机对照试验(RCT)的荟萃分析,以比较RVS和HB起搏与RVA起搏对心功能的中长期影响。方法 通过系统检索电子文献数据库PubMed®、Cochrane图书馆、Embase®和Ovid®来确定符合条件的RCT。结果 本荟萃分析纳入了17篇文章(n = 1290例患者),其中14项研究比较了RVA和RVS起搏对心功能的影响,3项研究比较了HBP与其他部位起搏的效果。与RVA起搏相比,随访结束时RVS或HBP表现出更高的左心室射血分数(LVEF)(加权平均差3.28;95%置信区间1.45,5.12)。结论 长期随访后,RVS起搏的LVEF高于RVA起搏。RVS起搏可替代先前使用的RVA起搏,作为具有更好临床结局的更佳选择。然而,仍需要更大规模的RCT来比较RVS与RVA起搏的安全性和有效性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/564e/6136004/9c833e9a26f2/10.1177_0300060518781415-fig1.jpg

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