首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>British Heart Journal >Comparison of permanent left ventricular and biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure and chronic atrial fibrillation: prospective haemodynamic study
【2h】

Comparison of permanent left ventricular and biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure and chronic atrial fibrillation: prospective haemodynamic study

机译:心力衰竭和慢性心房纤颤患者永久性左心室和双心室起搏的比较:前瞻性血液动力学研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Objective: To compare clinical and haemodynamic variables between left ventricular and biventricular pacing in patients with severe heart failure; and to analyse haemodynamic changes during daily life and maximum exercise during chronic left ventricular and biventricular pacing.>Design: Prospective single blinded randomised study with crossover.>Setting: University hospital (tertiary referral centre).>Patients and methods: 13 patients (mean (SD) age, 62 (6) years) with chronic atrial fibrillation, severe heart failure (mean ejection fraction 24 (8)%), and QRS prolongation of ≥ 140 ms had His bundle ablation and installation of a pacemaker providing left ventricular and biventricular pacing. The pacemaker was equipped with a peak endocardial acceleration (PEA) sensor. The PEA pattern was used as a haemodynamic marker during exercise as it is highly correlated with left ventricular dP/dt. After a baseline period of right ventricular pacing, all patients had two months of left ventricular pacing and two months of biventricular pacing in random order. At the end of each phase, an echocardiogram, a haemodynamic analysis at rest and on exercise during a six minute walk test, and a cardiopulmonary exercise test were performed.>Results: PEA values were higher with left ventricular pacing (0.58 (0.38) m/s) and biventricular pacing (0.62 (0.24) m/s) than at baseline (0.49 (0.18) m/s) (p < 0.05). The six minute walk test showed similar performance in both pacing modes, but patients had more symptoms with left ventricular pacing at the end of the test (p = 0.035). On cardiopulmonary exercise testing, there was a greater increase in mean percentage variation of PEA with biventricular pacing than with left ventricular pacing (125 (18)% v 97 (36)%, respectively; p = 0.048) and better performance figures (92 (34) W v 77 (23) W; p = 0.03).>Conclusions: During symptom limited and daily life exercise tests, chronic biventricular pacing provides better haemodynamic performance than left ventricular pacing. In heart failure patients with wide QRS complexes, the interventricular dyssynchronisation induced by left ventricular pacing may impair myocardial function during exercise.
机译:>目的:比较严重心力衰竭患者左心室和双心室起搏的临床和血液动力学变量;并分析慢性左心室和双心室起搏期间日常生活和最大运动量时的血流动力学变化。>设计:前瞻性单盲,随机交叉研究。>设置:大学医院(三级转诊) >患者和方法::13例患者(平均(SD)年龄,62(6)岁),患有慢性心房颤动,严重心力衰竭(平均射血分数为24(8)%)和QRS延长≥140 ms进行His束消融并安装起搏器,以使左心室和双心室起搏。起搏器配备了心内膜峰值加速度(PEA)传感器。 PEA模式在运动期间被用作血液动力学标记,因为它与左心室dP / dt高度相关。在右心室起搏的基线期之后,所有患者均以随机顺序进行了两个月的左心室起搏和两个月的双心室起搏。在每个阶段结束时,进行超声心动图检查,六分钟步行测试期间的休息和运动时的血流动力学分析以及心肺运动测试。>结果:左心室起搏时PEA值较高(0.58(0.38)m / s)和双心室起搏(0.62(0.24)m / s)比基线时(0.49(0.18)m / s)(p <0.05)。六分钟步行测试在两种起搏模式下均表现出相似的表现,但患者在测试结束时出现更多左室起搏的症状(p = 0.035)。在心肺运动测试中,双心室起搏的PEA的平均百分比变化比左心室起搏的平均百分比变化更大(分别为125(18)%对97(36)%; p = 0.048)和更好的性能指标(92( 34)W v 77(23)W; p = 0.03)。>结论:在症状受限和日常生活运动测试中,慢性双心室起搏比左心室起搏具有更好的血液动力学性能。在具有广泛QRS波群的心力衰竭患者中,左心室起搏引起的心室不同步可能会损害运动过程中的心肌功能。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号