Suppr超能文献

心尖部或间隔部右心室起搏患者的并发症和预后。

Complications and prognosis of patients undergoing apical or septal right ventricular pacing.

机构信息

BHF/University Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Edinburgh Heart Centre, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

出版信息

Open Heart. 2019 Feb 9;6(1):e000962. doi: 10.1136/openhrt-2018-000962. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Optimal right ventricular lead placement remains controversial. Large studies investigating the safety and long-term prognosis of apical and septal right ventricular lead placement have been lacking.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing pacemaker insertion for high-degree atrioventricular block at Edinburgh Heart Centre were investigated. Periprocedural 30-day complications were defined (infection/bleeding/pneumothorax/tamponade/lead displacement). Long-term clinical outcomes were obtained from the General Register of Scotland and electronic medical records. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, new heart failure, hospitalisation for a major cardiovascular event, as per the CArdiac REsynchronization in Heart Failure trial. Secondary endpoints were all-cause mortality, new heart failure and their composite.

RESULTS

820 patients were included, 204 (25%) paced from the septum and 616 (75%) from the apex. All baseline variables were similar with the exception of age (septal: 73.2±1.1 vs apical: 76.9±0.5 years, p<0.001). Procedure duration (58±23 vs 55±25 min, p=0.3), complication rates (18 (8.8) vs 46 (7.5)%, p=0.5) and postimplant QRS duration (152 (23) vs 154 (27) ms, p=0.4) were similar. After 1041 days (IQR 564), 278 patients met the primary endpoint, with no difference between the septal and apical groups in unadjusted (HR 0.86 (95% CIs 0.64 to 1.15)) or multivariable analysis correcting for age, gender and comorbidity (HR 0.97 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.30)). Similarly, no differences were observed in the secondary endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

This large real-world cohort of patients undergoing right ventricular lead placement in the septum or apex demonstrated no difference in procedural complications nor long-term clinical outcomes. Both pacing strategies appear reasonable in routine practice.

摘要

目的

右心室心尖部和间隔部导线的最佳植入部位仍存在争议。目前尚缺乏关于右心室心尖部和间隔部导线植入的安全性和长期预后的大型研究。

方法

连续调查了在爱丁堡心脏中心因高度房室传导阻滞而接受起搏器植入的患者。术中 30 天内并发症定义为(感染/出血/气胸/心脏压塞/导线移位)。从苏格兰综合登记册和电子病历中获得长期临床结果。主要终点是全因死亡率、新发心力衰竭、因主要心血管事件住院的复合终点,按照心脏再同步化治疗心力衰竭试验(CArdiac REsynchronization in Heart Failure trial)的标准定义。次要终点是全因死亡率、新发心力衰竭及其复合终点。

结果

共纳入 820 例患者,204 例(25%)从间隔部起搏,616 例(75%)从心尖部起搏。除年龄外,所有基线变量均相似(间隔部:73.2±1.1 岁 vs 心尖部:76.9±0.5 岁,p<0.001)。手术时间(58±23 分钟 vs 55±25 分钟,p=0.3)、并发症发生率(18(8.8)% vs 46(7.5)%,p=0.5)和植入后 QRS 波时限(152(23)毫秒 vs 154(27)毫秒,p=0.4)相似。在 1041 天(IQR 564)的随访后,278 例患者达到了主要终点,在未校正(HR 0.86(95%CI 0.64 至 1.15))或校正年龄、性别和合并症的多变量分析中(HR 0.97(95%CI 0.72 至 1.30)),间隔部和心尖部起搏组之间无差异。同样,在次要终点中也未观察到差异。

结论

这项在右心室心尖部和间隔部植入导线的真实世界大型队列研究表明,在手术并发症和长期临床结果方面,两者之间无差异。在常规实践中,这两种起搏策略似乎都是合理的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7c12/6443118/09879f00777d/openhrt-2018-000962f01.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