Tomassoni G, Newby K, Moredock L, Rembert J, Natale A
Animal Electrophysiology Research Laboratory, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1998 Jan;21(1 Pt 1):94-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1998.tb01066.x.
Little data is available comparing the efficacy of the Transvene, Endotak C 70 series, and the active CAN configuration on defibrillation success. In addition, the impact of the superior vena cava (SVC) electrode surface area and length on the active CAN system is unknown. Therefore, we compared the defibrillation efficacy of the Transvene and Endotak C 70 series lead systems with and without the active CAN in dogs. Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing was randomly performed in 20 dogs. In protocol I (10 dogs), DFT energy was compared in three RV/SVC lead systems with an SVC electrode defibrillating surface area of 90 mm2 (Transvene-90), 160 mm2 (Transvene-160), 617 mm2 (Endotak), and an RV/CAN configuration. In protocol II (10 dogs), DFT comparison was performed in the Transvene-90/CAN, Transvene-160/CAN, Endotak/CAN, and RV/CAN configurations. In protocol I, increasing the SVC surface area from 90 to 160 mm2 and from 160 to 617 mm2 significantly lowered DFT energy. The Endotak and the RV/CAN systems provided the lowest DFT energy requirements. In protocol II, the Endotak/CAN system significantly lowered DFT energy compared to the other three lead configurations. In both protocols, the impedance decreased as the SVC surface area increased from 90 to 160 mm2. However, no significant reduction in DFT impedance occurred as the SVC surface area increased from the Transvene-160 to the Endotak lead. Increasing the SVC surface area from 90 to 617 mm2 in a two coil lead system lowered DFT energy to similar levels provided by the RV/CAN configuration. The addition of an SVC electrode with a surface area of 90 or 160 mm2 did not reduce DFT energy compared to the RV/CAN configuration. The Endotak/CAN system, however, provided the lowest DFT requirements.
关于Transvene、Endotak C 70系列以及有源CAN配置在除颤成功率方面的疗效对比数据很少。此外，上腔静脉（SVC）电极表面积和长度对有源CAN系统的影响尚不清楚。因此，我们比较了有和没有有源CAN的Transvene和Endotak C 70系列导联系统在犬类中的除颤疗效。对20只犬随机进行除颤阈值（DFT）测试。在方案I（10只犬）中，比较了三种右心室/上腔静脉导联系统的DFT能量，其SVC电极除颤表面积分别为90平方毫米（Transvene - 90）、160平方毫米（Transvene - 160）、617平方毫米（Endotak），以及右心室/ CAN配置。在方案II（10只犬）中，对Transvene - 90/CAN、Transvene - 160/CAN、Endotak/CAN和右心室/ CAN配置进行了DFT比较。在方案I中，将SVC表面积从90平方毫米增加到160平方毫米以及从160平方毫米增加到617平方毫米可显著降低DFT能量。Endotak和右心室/ CAN系统所需的DFT能量最低。在方案II中，与其他三种导联配置相比，Endotak/CAN系统显著降低了DFT能量。在两个方案中，随着SVC表面积从90平方毫米增加到160平方毫米，阻抗降低。然而，当SVC表面积从Transvene - 160增加到Endotak导联时，DFT阻抗没有显著降低。在双线圈导联系统中，将SVC表面积从90平方毫米增加到617平方毫米可将DFT能量降低至右心室/ CAN配置所提供的类似水平。与右心室/ CAN配置相比，添加表面积为90或160平方毫米的SVC电极并没有降低DFT能量。然而，Endotak/CAN系统所需的DFT最低。
