Fukatani M, Hashiba K
Jpn Circ J. 1978 Mar;42(3):257-68. doi: 10.1253/jcj.42.257.
Fifty-nine patients aged 39-80 years underwent implantation of a cardiac pacemaker and were followed for up to 9 years (average duration of pacing 39 months). Atrioventricular conduction disturbances (complete atrioventricular block, 2 : 1 atrioventricular block, bifascicular block, and atrial fibrillation with slow ventricular rate) were present in 49 patients and sick sinus syndrome (sinus arrest or sino-atrial block, and bradycardia-tachycardia syndrome) in 10. Pacing was required because of Adams-Stokes attacks in 41 patients, 2 of whom also had congestive heart failure. It was required in 6 because of frequent dizziness, in 10 because of congestive heart failure, and in 2 because of low cardiac output. The symptomatic improvement after cardiac pacing was well recognized in most of our patients, and 32 (54 percent) of the 59 patients pursued normal physical and daily activity. Although the efficacy of pacemaker therapy was of limited value in some patients with congestive heart failure or underlying or coexisting diseases, the beneficial effects following pacemaker implantation were: (1) abolishment of transient neurologic symptoms such as Adams-Stokes attack, (2) relief from a constant fear of a recurrence of an Adams-Stokes attack or sudden cardiac death, and (3) improvement in restricted physical activity due to low cardiac output. Thus, we conclude that pacemaker implantation in most patients with bradyarrhythmias is beneficial not only for the treatment of the acute problem but also because it prolongs life and greatly enhances its quality. However, in spite of the beneficial effects after pacemaker implantation, we still observe a number of complications connected with the use of a permanent pacemaker. Therefore, our policy is to implant a permanent pacemaker following the execution of sufficient studies of the bradyarrhythmia and the etiology of symptoms, and then under taking long-term follow-up of the patients.
59例年龄在39至80岁之间的患者接受了心脏起搏器植入手术,并随访了长达9年(平均起搏时间为39个月)。49例患者存在房室传导障碍(完全性房室传导阻滞、2∶1房室传导阻滞、双分支阻滞以及伴有缓慢心室率的心房颤动),10例患者患有病态窦房结综合征(窦性停搏或窦房阻滞以及心动过缓-心动过速综合征)。41例患者因阿-斯综合征发作需要起搏治疗,其中2例还患有充血性心力衰竭。6例因频繁头晕需要起搏治疗,10例因充血性心力衰竭需要起搏治疗,2例因心输出量低需要起搏治疗。在我们大多数患者中,心脏起搏后症状改善明显,59例患者中有32例(54%)恢复了正常的身体和日常活动。尽管起搏器治疗对一些患有充血性心力衰竭或潜在或并存疾病的患者疗效有限,但起搏器植入后的有益作用包括:(1)消除诸如阿-斯综合征发作等短暂性神经症状;(2)缓解对阿-斯综合征发作复发或心源性猝死的持续恐惧;(3)改善因心输出量低而受限的身体活动。因此,我们得出结论,大多数缓慢性心律失常患者植入起搏器不仅有利于治疗急性问题,而且还能延长生命并显著提高生活质量。然而,尽管起搏器植入后有有益作用,但我们仍观察到一些与永久性起搏器使用相关的并发症。因此,我们的策略是在对缓慢性心律失常和症状病因进行充分研究后植入永久性起搏器,然后对患者进行长期随访。