Le Heuzey J Y, Guize L, Valty J, Moutet J P, Kouz S, Lavergne T, Boutjdir M, Peronneau P
Cardiovasc Res. 1986 Feb;20(2):81-8. doi: 10.1093/cvr/20.2.81.
Sinoatrial conduction times, estimated by premature atrial stimulation, were compared with direct measurement of the sinoatrial conduction time in 15 isolated rabbit sinus node preparations before and after intrasinusal pacemaker shifts induced by cooling. Transmembrane potentials and surface electrograms were recorded from the sinus node and crista terminalis. Extracellular sinus node activity was recorded in five preparations. Mapping was performed at 38 degrees C and 35 degrees C to determine the site of the dominant pacemaker. The sinus cycle was significantly longer at 35 degrees C (319.4 ms vs 258.1 ms). Intracellular measured conduction time was significantly shorter (63.8 ms vs 70.4 ms) because of caudal shift of the dominant pacemaker. Estimated sinoatrial conduction time was significantly longer (110.3 ms vs 85.4 ms) owing to the depression of automaticity by the extrastimulus. Extracellular measured conduction time did not differ significantly from intracellular measured conduction time. These results suggest that intrasinusal pacemaker shift may explain inaccuracies in indirect estimations of sinoatrial conduction time by atrial pacing techniques. Extracellular recordings appear to be a better method of evaluating sinoatrial conduction times.
通过房性期前刺激估算的窦房传导时间,与15个离体兔窦房结标本在冷却引起的窦内起搏点移位前后窦房传导时间的直接测量值进行了比较。从窦房结和终嵴记录跨膜电位和体表心电图。在5个标本中记录细胞外窦房结活动。在38℃和35℃进行标测以确定主导起搏点的位置。在35℃时窦性周期明显更长(319.4毫秒对258.1毫秒)。由于主导起搏点的尾侧移位,细胞内测量的传导时间明显缩短(63.8毫秒对70.4毫秒)。由于额外刺激使自律性降低,估算的窦房传导时间明显更长(110.3毫秒对85.4毫秒)。细胞外测量的传导时间与细胞内测量的传导时间无显著差异。这些结果表明,窦内起搏点移位可能解释了心房起搏技术间接估算窦房传导时间时的不准确之处。细胞外记录似乎是评估窦房传导时间的更好方法。