Sinha Sunil K, Carlson Daniel, Chrispin Jonathan, Barth Andreas S, Rickard John Jack, Spragg David D, Berger Ronald, Love Charles, Calkins Hugh, Tomaselli Gordon F, Marine Joseph E
Division of Cardiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2018 Dec;41(12):1611-1618. doi: 10.1111/pace.13532. Epub 2018 Nov 11.
Pacemaker patients experience battery depletion that activates pacemaker's alert for replacement notification. Automatic reprogramming at replacement notification can result in loss of rate response and atrioventricular (AV) synchrony.
To determine if relevant symptoms or clinical events may be associated with automatic reprogramming at replacement notification.
Electronic medical record review was undertaken for 298 patients referred for pacemaker generator replacement. Primary endpoints were symptoms or clinical events during replacement notification period.
Following elimination of duplicate pacemaker replacements (n = 12), "near-replacement notification" or "recalled" (n = 15) and pacemakers at "end of life" (n = 5), 266 subjects were included. Three distinct reprogramming cohorts were identified; those with no change (control) in pacing mode (n = 46), those with loss of rate response (n = 154), and those with loss of AV synchrony ± rate response (n = 66). In total, 83 subjects (31.2%) had symptoms with significant differences seen between groups (control = 4.3%, loss of rate response = 26.0%, loss of AV synchrony ± rate response = 62.1%, P < 0.001). Overall, 28 subjects (10.5%) experienced clinical events with significant differences seen between groups (control = 0.0%, loss of rate response = 6.5%, loss of AV synchrony ± rate response = 27.3%, P < 0.001).
Automatic reprogramming at replacement notification was associated with significant symptoms in 26% of those who lost rate response and in 62% of those who lost AV synchrony ± rate response. Additionally, 27% of the latter cohort required nonelective clinical care.
起搏器患者会经历电池耗尽,这会激活起搏器发出更换通知的警报。更换通知时的自动重新编程可能导致心率应答和房室(AV)同步性丧失。
确定在更换通知时进行自动重新编程是否可能与相关症状或临床事件有关。
对298例因起搏器发生器更换而转诊的患者进行电子病历审查。主要终点是更换通知期内的症状或临床事件。
在排除重复的起搏器更换(n = 12)、“接近更换通知”或“召回”(n = 15)以及处于“使用寿命结束”的起搏器(n = 5)后,纳入了266名受试者。确定了三个不同的重新编程队列;起搏模式无变化(对照)的患者(n = 46)、心率应答丧失的患者(n = 154)以及房室同步性±心率应答丧失的患者(n = 66)。共有83名受试者(31.2%)出现症状,各组之间存在显著差异(对照 = 4.3%,心率应答丧失 = 26.0%,房室同步性±心率应答丧失 = 62.1%,P < 0.001)。总体而言,28名受试者(10.5%)经历了临床事件,各组之间存在显著差异(对照 = 0.0%,心率应答丧失 = 6.5%,房室同步性±心率应答丧失 = 27.3%,P < 0.001)。
在更换通知时进行自动重新编程与26%心率应答丧失的患者以及62%房室同步性±心率应答丧失的患者出现的显著症状有关。此外,后一组队列中有27%的患者需要非选择性临床护理。