Suppr超能文献

慢性双腔起搏(DDD)和双传感器心室按需起搏(VVIR)模式对完全性心脏传导阻滞患者生活质量和心肺功能影响的随机单盲交叉比较

A randomized, single-blind crossover comparison of the effects of chronic DDD and dual sensor VVIR pacing mode on quality-of-life and cardiopulmonary performance in complete heart block.

作者信息

Deharo J C, Badier M, Thirion X, Ritter P, Provenier F, Graux P, Guillot C, Mugica J, Jordaens L, Djiane P

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Hôpital Sainte-Marguerite, Marseille, France.

出版信息

Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1996 Sep;19(9):1320-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1996.tb04210.x.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare DDD and dual sensor VVIR (activity and QT) pacing modes in complete AV block (CAVB). Eighteen patients (14 men and 4 women, aged 70 +/- 6.5 years) implanted with a dual chamber, dual sensor pacemaker for CAVB with normal sinus node chronotropic function were studied. A quality-of-life and cardiovascular symptom questionnaire, and a treadmill exercise test were completed after a period of VVIR and a period of DDD pacing, each lasting 1 month. Overall quality-of-life and cardiovascular symptoms did not significantly differ, though three patients felt discomfort during VVIR mode. There was no significant statistical difference in cardiopulmonary parameters. DDD and VVIR modes yielded the following respective data: maximum heart rate = 105.7 +/- 21.8 beats/minute versus 107.6 +/- 21.6 beats/minute (NS); maximum workload = 60 +/- 33.4 W versus 59.3 +/- 37.8 W (NS); treadmill duration = 10.1 +/- 3.8 minute versus 10.1 +/- 3.6 minute (NS); oxygen consumption at anaerobic threshold = 14.6 +/- 4.1 mL/kg per minute versus 14.9 +/- 4.6 mL/kg per minute (NS); maximum minute ventilation = 49.6 +/- 9L/min versus 46 +/- 12 L/min (NS); and respiratory quotient = 1.08 +/- 0.15 versus 1.08 +/- 0.13 (NS). We conclude that, during a 1-month follow-up period, no difference was found between DDD and dual sensor VVIR (QT and activity) pacing modes in CAVB patients with regard to quality-of-life and cardiopulmonary performance, though a trend toward an increased sense of well being was noted with the DDD mode.

摘要

本研究旨在比较完全性房室传导阻滞(CAVB)患者中DDD起搏模式与双传感器VVIR(活动与QT)起搏模式。对18例植入双腔双传感器起搏器的CAVB患者进行了研究,这些患者窦房结变时功能正常,年龄70±6.5岁(14例男性,4例女性)。在分别持续1个月的VVIR起搏期和DDD起搏期结束后,完成了生活质量和心血管症状问卷以及平板运动试验。总体生活质量和心血管症状无显著差异,不过有3例患者在VVIR模式下感到不适。心肺参数无显著统计学差异。DDD和VVIR模式分别得出以下数据:最大心率=105.7±21.8次/分钟对107.6±21.6次/分钟(无显著性差异);最大工作量=60±33.4瓦对59.3±37.8瓦(无显著性差异);平板运动持续时间=10.1±3.8分钟对10.1±3.6分钟(无显著性差异);无氧阈时的耗氧量=14.6±4.1毫升/千克每分钟对14.9±4.6毫升/千克每分钟(无显著性差异);最大分钟通气量=49.6±9升/分钟对46±12升/分钟(无显著性差异);呼吸商=1.08±0.15对1.08±0.13(无显著性差异)。我们得出结论,在1个月的随访期内,对于CAVB患者,DDD起搏模式与双传感器VVIR(QT与活动)起搏模式在生活质量和心肺功能方面未发现差异,不过DDD模式有幸福感增加的趋势。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验