Suppr超能文献

为患有间歇性心动过缓和单腔起搏器的患者选择刺激频率。

Choosing the stimulation rate in patients with intermittent bradycardia and a single lead pacemaker.

作者信息

Rosenqvist M, Edhag O K, Lagergren H, Nordlander R, Vallin H

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.

出版信息

Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1993 Apr;16(4 Pt 1):702-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1993.tb01648.x.

Abstract

In order to assess the prevalence of intermittent bradycardia in a pacemaker population, we retrospectively evaluated the occurrence of intrinsic heart activity in 229 patients with ventricular pacing. Spontaneous heart activity was recorded in 60% of the patients. However, the stimulation rate had been decreased in only 40% of the patients in order to allow for longer periods of intrinsic heart activity. In the second part of the study we prospectively assessed differences in pacemaker utilization in 19 patients with intermittent bradycardia and single lead pacemakers. All patients were observed over four periods of 14 days, with the following pacing modes: 70 beats/min, 50 beats/min, hysteresis sensing 50 beats/min, and pacing 70 beats/min; and search hysteresis sensing 50 beats/min and pacing 70 beats/min. Search hysteresis pacing is a new feature that theoretically allows for a shorter time of pacing than that of hysteresis pacing. A reduction in the stimulation rate from 70 beats/min to 50 beats/min resulted in a 60% reduction in pacemaker utilization (P < 0.05). Search hysteresis decreased pacemaker utilization by 33% (P < 0.05). There was no statistical difference between conventional hysteresis and fixed rate pacing at 70 beats/min. Most patients found fixed rate pacing preferable to hysteresis pacing. In order to minimize battery consumption and to avoid unfavorable hemodynamics in patients with ventricular pacing, the stimulation mode and rate should be optimized in patients with intermittent bradycardia to allow for longer periods of intrinsic heart activity.

摘要

为了评估起搏器人群中间歇性心动过缓的患病率,我们回顾性评估了229例心室起搏患者的固有心脏活动情况。60%的患者记录到了自发心脏活动。然而,只有40%的患者降低了刺激频率,以便有更长时间的固有心脏活动。在研究的第二部分,我们前瞻性评估了19例间歇性心动过缓患者和单腔起搏器患者在起搏器使用方面的差异。所有患者均接受了四个为期14天的观察期,采用以下起搏模式:70次/分钟、50次/分钟、磁滞感知50次/分钟且起搏70次/分钟;以及搜索磁滞感知50次/分钟且起搏70次/分钟。搜索磁滞起搏是一项新功能,理论上与磁滞起搏相比,其起搏时间更短。刺激频率从70次/分钟降至50次/分钟导致起搏器使用率降低了60%(P<0.05)。搜索磁滞使起搏器使用率降低了33%(P<0.05)。常规磁滞与70次/分钟的固定频率起搏之间无统计学差异。大多数患者发现固定频率起搏比磁滞起搏更可取。为了使心室起搏患者的电池消耗最小化并避免不良血流动力学,对于间歇性心动过缓患者,应优化刺激模式和频率,以获得更长时间的固有心脏活动。

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