Schuchert A, Van Langen H, Michels K, Meinertz T
Department of Cardiology, University-Hospital Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1996 Nov;19(11 Pt 2):1824-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1996.tb03233.x.
Projected pacemaker longevity is calculated according to the nominal setting, which is 3.5 V for pulse amplitude in most present day pacemakers. The aim of this study was to test whether the nominal ventricular output setting of 3.5 V and 0.4 ms provides a 100% safety margin if these pacemakers are connected to implanted ventricular pacing leads. The study included 24 patients undergoing pulse generator exchange. The new pacemaker was either a Thera DR (n = 21) or Thera SR (n = 3) device. Ventricular pacing leads were implanted 70 +/- 38 months previously. Intraoperative measurements included pacing threshold at 0.5-ms pulse duration, impedance, and R wave amplitude. To achieve a 100% safety margin with 3.5 V, the cut-off pacing threshold is 1.7 V. At discharge it was assessed whether ventricular pulse amplitude remained at < or = 3.5 V or was programmed to > 3.5 V. At pulse generator exchange, pacing threshold was 1.2 +/- 0.5 V, including four patients with pacing thresholds > 1.7 V. Impedance was 587 +/- 189 omega and R wave amplitude was 12.8 +/- 4.8 mV. At discharge, ventricular pulse amplitude remained at the nominal setting in 13 patients, including 2 patients with high pacing thresholds at pacemaker exchange, and was programmed to < 3.5 V in 7 patients. Ventricular pulse amplitude was programmed to > 3.5 V in four patients. Two of these patients had high pacing thresholds (> 1.7 V/0.5 ms) at pulse generator exchange; the other two patients were programmed to > 3.5 V, although 3.5 V already provided a 100% safety margin. After pulse generator exchange, 92% of the patients could be paced with a 3.5-V pulse amplitude. Pacemakers were programmed in four patients > 3.5 V, but in only two of them to obtain a sufficient safety margin. High pacing thresholds at pulse generator exchange did not generally predict high pacing thresholds at discharge.
预计起搏器寿命是根据标称设置计算得出的,在大多数现代起搏器中,脉冲幅度的标称设置为3.5V。本研究的目的是测试如果这些起搏器与植入的心室起搏导线相连,3.5V和0.4ms的标称心室输出设置是否能提供100%的安全裕度。该研究纳入了24例接受脉冲发生器更换的患者。新的起搏器为Thera DR(n = 21)或Thera SR(n = 3)设备。心室起搏导线于70±38个月前植入。术中测量包括0.5ms脉冲持续时间时的起搏阈值、阻抗和R波幅度。为了在3.5V时达到100%的安全裕度,截止起搏阈值为1.7V。出院时评估心室脉冲幅度是否保持在≤3.5V或是否被程控为>3.5V。在脉冲发生器更换时,起搏阈值为1.2±0.5V,其中包括4例起搏阈值>1.7V的患者。阻抗为587±189Ω,R波幅度为12.8±4.8mV。出院时,13例患者的心室脉冲幅度保持在标称设置,其中包括2例在起搏器更换时起搏阈值较高的患者,7例患者的心室脉冲幅度被程控为<3.5V。4例患者的心室脉冲幅度被程控为>3.5V。其中2例患者在脉冲发生器更换时起搏阈值较高(>1.7V/0.5ms);另外2例患者被程控为>3.5V,尽管3.5V已经提供了100%的安全裕度。脉冲发生器更换后,92%的患者可以用3.5V的脉冲幅度进行起搏。4例患者的起搏器被程控为>3.5V,但其中只有2例是为了获得足够的安全裕度。脉冲发生器更换时的高起搏阈值通常不能预测出院时的高起搏阈值。