首页> 外文期刊>Yonsei Medical Journal >Long-Term Outcome of Single-Chamber Atrial Pacing Compared with Dual-Chamber Pacing in Patients with Sinus-Node Dysfunction and Intact Atrioventricular Node Conduction
【24h】

Long-Term Outcome of Single-Chamber Atrial Pacing Compared with Dual-Chamber Pacing in Patients with Sinus-Node Dysfunction and Intact Atrioventricular Node Conduction

机译:窦房结功能不全和房室结传导完整的患者单室起搏与双室起搏的长期结果

获取原文
           

摘要

Purpose The optimal pacing mode with either single chamber atrial pacemaker (AAI or AAIR) or dual chamber pacemaker (DDD or DDDR) is still not clear in sinus-node dysfunction (SND) and intact atrioventricular (AV) conduction. Materials and Methods Patients who were implanted with permanent pacemaker using AAI(R) (n = 73) or DDD(R) (n = 113) were compared. Results The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups, with a mean follow-up duration of 69 months. The incidence of death did not show statistical difference. However, the incidence of hospitalization for congestive heart failure (CHF) was significantly lower in the AAI(R) group (0%) than the DDD(R) group (8.8%, p = 0.03). Also, atrial fibrillation (AF) was found in 2.8% in the AAI(R) group, which was statistically different from 15.2% of patients in the DDD(R) group ( p = 0.01). Four patients (5.5%) with AAI(R) developed AV block, and subsequently switched to DDD(R) pacing. The risk of AF was lower in the patients implanted with AAI(R) than those with DDD(R) [hazard ratio (HR), 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 0.97, p = 0.02]. Conclusion In patients with SND and intact AV conduction, AAI(R) pacing can achieve a better clinical outcome in terms of occurrence of CHF and AF than DDD(R) pacing. These findings support AAI(R) pacing as the preferred pacing mode in patients with SND and intact AV conduction.
机译:目的单窦房性起搏器(AAI或AAIR)或双室起搏器(DDD或DDDR)的最佳起搏模式在窦房结功能不全(SND)和完整房室(AV)传导方面仍不清楚。材料与方法比较了使用AAI(r)(n = 73)或DDD(R)(n = 113)植入永久起搏器的患者。结果两组的基线特征相当,平均随访时间为69个月。死亡发生率无统计学差异。但是,AAI®组(0%)的充血性心力衰竭(CHF)住院率明显低于DDD®组(8.8%,p = 0.03)。此外,在AAI(R)组中发现房颤(AF)占2.8%,与DDD(R)组中15.2%的患者统计学上存在差异(p = 0.01)。四名(5.5%)AAI(R)患者发展为房室传导阻滞,随后改用DDD(R)起搏。植入AAI(R)的患者发生AF的风险低于植入DAI(R)的患者[风险比(HR)为0.84; 95%置信区间0.72至0.97,p = 0.02]。结论在SND和AV传导完整的患者中,在发生CHF和AF方面,AAI(R)起搏比DDD(R)起搏能获得更好的临床结果。这些发现支持在SND和完整AV传导患者中起搏是首选的起搏模式。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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