Falk R H, Battinelli N J
Department of Medicine, Boston City Hospital, Massachusetts 02118.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993 Nov 1;22(5):1354-8. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(93)90542-9.
The objective of this study was to determine whether the threshold for successful cardiac pacing is affected by electrode impedance and whether this procedure can be successfully carried out through low impedance electrodes that are also suitable for defibrillation.
Reintroduced in the early 1980s, external cardiac pacing utilizes large externally placed electrodes with a high impedance, in conjunction with a stimulator capable of producing an impulse of 20 to 40 ms in duration. On the basis of empiric observation, high impedance electrodes (> 500 omega) are believed to be optimal for external cardiac pacing. Such electrodes are unsuitable for defibrillation, a technique that is most successful when impedance is low. In view of the absence of controlled data to support this recommendation, as well as the desirability of using one set of electrodes for both pacing and defibrillation, we undertook the following study.
Thirty-two normal subjects underwent a total of 110 attempts at external cardiac pacing with either (or both) high or low impedance electrodes in combination with one or two commercially available external cardiac pacemakers. Each subject underwent pacing at least twice in a randomized double-blind fashion to determine the pacing threshold and level of discomfort.
Individual subjects had a wide range of pacing thresholds but did not experience any greater discomfort with one pacemaker-electrode combination than with any other. Similarly, no pacemaker-electrode combination was superior to another in terms of pacing thresholds. The mean pacing threshold was 72.5 +/- 6 mA for the 40-ms impulse/high impedance electrode combination, 78.7 +/- 6 mA for the 40-ms impulse/low impedance electrode, 73.8 +/- 7 mA for the 20-ms impulse/high impedance electrode and 77.5 +/- 7 mA for the 20-ms impulse/low impedance electrode (p = NS for all comparisons).
Contrary to previous belief, a high impedance electrode offers no advantage for external pacing in terms of either pacing threshold or discomfort level during pacing. This study demonstrates that it is feasible to perform external pacing through an electrode that is also suitable for defibrillation and suggests that a single external pacing-defibrillation electrode is all that is needed to perform these two procedures.
本研究的目的是确定成功心脏起搏的阈值是否受电极阻抗影响,以及该操作能否通过同样适用于除颤的低阻抗电极成功进行。
外部心脏起搏于20世纪80年代初重新引入,它使用置于体外的大型高阻抗电极,并结合能够产生持续时间为20至40毫秒冲动的刺激器。根据经验观察,高阻抗电极(>500欧姆)被认为是外部心脏起搏的最佳选择。这种电极不适合除颤,而除颤技术在阻抗较低时最为成功。鉴于缺乏支持该建议的对照数据,以及希望使用一组电极进行起搏和除颤,我们进行了以下研究。
32名正常受试者使用高或低阻抗电极与一或两个市售的体外心脏起搏器组合,总共进行了110次体外心脏起搏尝试。每位受试者以随机双盲方式至少进行两次起搏,以确定起搏阈值和不适程度。
个体受试者的起搏阈值范围很广,但与任何其他起搏器-电极组合相比,使用一种组合时并未感到更大的不适。同样,就起搏阈值而言,没有一种起搏器-电极组合优于另一种。对于40毫秒冲动/高阻抗电极组合,平均起搏阈值为72.5±6毫安;对于40毫秒冲动/低阻抗电极,为78.7±6毫安;对于20毫秒冲动/高阻抗电极,为73.8±7毫安;对于20毫秒冲动/低阻抗电极,为77.5±7毫安(所有比较的p值均无统计学意义)。
与先前的看法相反,高阻抗电极在起搏阈值或起搏期间的不适程度方面,对体外起搏并无优势。本研究表明,通过同样适用于除颤的电极进行体外起搏是可行的,并表明进行这两种操作只需要一个体外起搏-除颤电极。