Suppr超能文献

电极极性的改变是否会影响经食管双向直流电复律的结果?

Does the change of the polarity of electrodes influence the results of transoesophageal bidirectional DC cardioversion?

作者信息

Poleszak K, Kutarski A, Koziara D, Baszak J, Oleszczak K

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, University Medical Academy, Lublin, Poland.

出版信息

Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1998 Jan;21(1 Pt 2):176-80. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1998.tb01084.x.

Abstract

The aim of the study was to compare the bidirectional transoesophageal DC cardioversion (BOC) with unidirectional transoesophageal DC cardioversion (UOC) and to evaluate, if the reversion of the polarity of electrodes alters the effectiveness and the amount of energy during BOC. UOC was attempted in 300 patients (pts) with atrial fibrillation (AF) and BOC in 241 pts with AF. In UOC mode shocks were delivered between the 4-ring oesophageal electrode (cathode) and the chest pad (anode) positioned in the precordial region. In BOC shocks were delivered between the same oesophageal electrode and two chest pads joined with each other, positioned on both sides of the sternum. First 147 pts were cardioverted with the oesophageal electrode as a cathode, next 94 with an anode in oesophageal position. The effectiveness of both modes (UOC and BOC) was very high, however in pts with chronic AF success rate was better in BOC approach (82% vs 100%). BOC, compared with UOC, allowed to decrease the threshold defibrillation significantly: in pts with recent onset of AF from 61.5 J to 33.3 J and in pts with chronic AF from 99.8 J to 75.2 J. In pts with long standing AF the reduction of the defibrillation threshold was statistically not significant (from 68.6 J to 50.6 J). The effectiveness of BOC was also very high independently of the polarity of electrodes. The change of the polarity did not affect the minimal and total successful energy of shocks, too. In pts with oesophageal electrode as a cathode defibrillation threshold was 48.4 J and in pts with the anodal electrode 43.7 J. In conclusions we found BOC as a very effective method in pts with AF. Defibrillation threshold in BOC is lower than in UOC and the polarity of electrodes does not influence the success rate and successful energy.

摘要

本研究的目的是比较双向经食管直流电复律(BOC)与单向经食管直流电复律(UOC),并评估在BOC过程中电极极性的改变是否会影响复律效果和能量用量。对300例心房颤动(AF)患者尝试进行UOC,对241例AF患者尝试进行BOC。在UOC模式下,电击在位于心前区的4环食管电极(阴极)和胸垫(阳极)之间进行。在BOC中,电击在同一食管电极与两个相互连接、位于胸骨两侧的胸垫之间进行。首先,147例患者以食管电极为阴极进行复律,接下来94例以食管电极为阳极进行复律。两种模式(UOC和BOC)的复律效果都非常高,然而在慢性AF患者中,BOC方法的成功率更高(82%对100%)。与UOC相比,BOC能显著降低除颤阈值:在近期发生AF的患者中,从61.5 J降至33.3 J;在慢性AF患者中,从99.8 J降至75.2 J。在长期AF患者中,除颤阈值的降低在统计学上不显著(从68.6 J降至50.6 J)。BOC的有效性也非常高,与电极极性无关。电极极性的改变也不影响电击的最小成功能量和总成功能量。在食管电极为阴极的患者中,除颤阈值为48.4 J,在食管电极为阳极的患者中为43.7 J。总之,我们发现BOC对AF患者是一种非常有效的方法。BOC的除颤阈值低于UOC,电极极性不影响成功率和成功能量。

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