Cardio-Thoracic Unit, Bordeaux University Hospital (CHU), Pessac, France; IHU Liryc, Electrophysiology and Heart Modeling Institute, Fondation Bordeaux Université, Pessac-Bordeaux, France.
Cardio-Thoracic Unit, Bordeaux University Hospital (CHU), Pessac, France; IHU Liryc, Electrophysiology and Heart Modeling Institute, Fondation Bordeaux Université, Pessac-Bordeaux, France.
Heart Rhythm. 2020 Dec;17(12):2072-2077. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.07.032. Epub 2020 Jul 30.
The Heart Rhythm Society, the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming recommends burst antitachycardia pacing (ATP) for the treatment of ventricular tachycardia (VT) up to high rates. The number of bursts is not specified, and treatment by ramps or low-energy shocks is not recommended.
We investigated the efficacy and safety of progressive therapies for VTs between 150 and 200 beats/min. After 3 failed bursts, we compared 3 ramps vs 3 bursts followed by a low-energy shock vs high-energy shock.
Using remote monitoring, we included monomorphic VT episodes treated with ≥1 burst.
A total of 1126 VT episodes were included. A single burst was as likely to terminate VT between 150 and 200 beats/min as VT between 200 and 230 beats/min (63% vs 64%; P=.41), but was more likely to accelerate the latter (3.2% vs 0.25%; P<.01). For VT <200 beats/min, the likelihood of ATP success increased progressively (73% with 2 bursts, 78% with 3 bursts). Three additional bursts further increased VT termination to 89%, similar to the success rate with 3 additional ramps (88%; P=.17). Programming 6 bursts is associated with the probability of acceleration requiring shock of 6.6%. A low-energy first shock was less successful than a high-energy shock (66% vs 86%; P<.01) and more likely to accelerate VT (17% vs 0%; P<.01).
Programming up to 6 burst ATP therapies for VTs 150-200 beats/min can avoid implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks in most patients. Ramp ATP after failed bursts were similarly effective. Low-energy shocks are less effective and more arrhythmogenic than high-energy shocks.
心脏节律学会、欧洲心脏节律协会、亚太心脏节律学会、拉丁美洲心脏节律学会专家共识声明建议使用爆发性抗心动过速起搏(ATP)治疗心室心动过速(VT),最高速率可达高。未指定爆发的次数,也不建议通过斜坡或低能量冲击进行治疗。
我们研究了 150-200 次/分之间 VT 的渐进性治疗的疗效和安全性。在 3 次爆发失败后,我们比较了 3 个斜坡与 3 个爆发后紧接着低能量冲击与高能冲击。
使用远程监测,我们纳入了≥1 次爆发治疗的单形性 VT 发作。
共纳入 1126 次 VT 发作。单次爆发终止 150-200 次/分之间的 VT 与终止 200-230 次/分之间的 VT 的可能性相同(63%与 64%;P=0.41),但更有可能加速后者(3.2%与 0.25%;P<0.01)。对于<200 次/分的 VT,ATP 成功的可能性逐渐增加(2 次爆发为 73%,3 次爆发为 78%)。再增加 3 次爆发可将 VT 终止率提高至 89%,与 3 次额外斜坡的成功率相似(88%;P=0.17)。编程 6 次爆发与需要电击的加速概率为 6.6%相关。低能量首次冲击的成功率低于高能冲击(66%与 86%;P<0.01),且更有可能加速 VT(17%与 0%;P<0.01)。
对于 150-200 次/分的 VT,编程多达 6 次爆发 ATP 治疗可避免大多数患者进行植入式心脏复律除颤器电击。在爆发失败后进行斜坡 ATP 同样有效。低能量冲击比高能冲击效果差且更具心律失常性。