McIntosh S J, Lawson J, Bexton R S, Gold R G, Tynan M M, Kenny R A
Cardiovascular Investigation Unit, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Type, United Kingdom.
Heart. 1997 Jun;77(6):553-7. doi: 10.1136/hrt.77.6.553.
To determine whether single chamber ventricular demand (VVI) pacing is adequate for elderly patients with carotid sinus syndrome.
Prospective double blind randomised cross over study.
Tertiary referral centre.
30 consecutive patients aged over 60 years with carotid sinus syndrome referred for cardiac pacing.
Patients underwent dual chamber pacemaker implantation and were then randomised to two three-month periods of VVI and DDI pacing.
Responses to cardiovascular tests (vasodepression during carotid sinus massage, pacemaker effect, postural blood pressure measurements, and response to head up tilt), and symptoms.
11 patients developed profound hypotension during upright carotid sinus massage while pacing VVI compared with only two while pacing DDI. The upright pacemaker effect was greater in VVI (VVI, -31 (SD 19) mm Hg v DDI, -4 (12) mm Hg; P < 0.001). Postural blood pressure measurements and responses to head up tilt did not vary. Eleven patients were unable to tolerate VVI pacing and had to be withdrawn early from this limb of the study (group A). Fourteen of the remainder completed diary cards and did not express a preference (group B). No patient preferred VVI. Group A patients were older (group A, 78 (6) years v group B, 70 (9) years; P < 0.05), were more likely to be female (group A, 73% v group B, 14%; P < 0.01), and were more likely to have orthostatic hypotension while pacing DDI (group A, 46% v group B, 0%; P < 0.01). Group A and B patients could not be differentiated by other prepacing clinical or haemodynamic variables.
Elderly patients with carotid sinus syndrome are likely to develop symptomatic hypotension following VVI pacing. The optimum pacing mode for individual patients cannot be predicted by simple cardiovascular tests before pacing.
确定单腔心室按需(VVI)起搏对老年颈动脉窦综合征患者是否足够。
前瞻性双盲随机交叉研究。
三级转诊中心。
30例连续的年龄超过60岁的因心脏起搏而转诊的颈动脉窦综合征患者。
患者接受双腔起搏器植入,然后随机分为两个为期三个月的VVI起搏期和DDI起搏期。
对心血管测试(颈动脉窦按摩时的血管减压、起搏器效应、体位性血压测量以及对抬头倾斜的反应)的反应和症状。
11例患者在VVI起搏时直立颈动脉窦按摩期间出现严重低血压,而在DDI起搏时只有2例出现。VVI起搏时直立起搏器效应更大(VVI,-31(标准差19)mmHg对DDI,-4(12)mmHg;P<0.001)。体位性血压测量和对抬头倾斜的反应没有差异。11例患者无法耐受VVI起搏,必须提前退出该研究组(A组)。其余14例完成了日记卡,未表达偏好(B组)。没有患者更喜欢VVI。A组患者年龄更大(A组,78(6)岁对B组,70(9)岁;P<0.05),女性比例更高(A组,73%对B组,14%;P<0.01),在DDI起搏时出现体位性低血压的可能性更大(A组,46%对B组,0%;P<0.01)。A组和B组患者无法通过起搏前的其他临床或血流动力学变量进行区分。
老年颈动脉窦综合征患者在VVI起搏后可能出现症状性低血压。起搏前通过简单的心血管测试无法预测个体患者的最佳起搏模式。