...
首页> 外文期刊>Europace: European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology >2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS focused update to 2015 expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing
【24h】

2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS focused update to 2015 expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing

机译:2019年HRS / EHRA / APHRS / LAHRS专注于2015年的专家协商委员会关于最佳植入式Cardioverter除颤器编程和测试的专家共识声明

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE Expert Consensus Statement on Optimal Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Programming and Testing provided guidance on bradycardia programming, tachycardia detection, tachycardia therapy, and defibrillation testing for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patient treatment. The 32 recommendations represented the consensus opinion of the writing group, graded by Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence. In addition, Appendix B provided manufacturer-specific translations of these recommendations into clinical practice consistent with the recommendations within the parent document. In some instances, programming guided by quality evidence gained from studies performed in devices from some manufacturers was translated such that this programming was approximated in another manufacturer's ICD programming settings. The authors found that the data, although not formally tested, were strong, consistent, and generalizable beyond the specific manufacturer and model of ICD. As expected, because these recommendations represented strategic choices to balance risks, there have been reports in which adverse outcomes were documented with ICDs programmed to Appendix B recommendations. The recommendations have been reviewed and updated to minimize such adverse events. Notably, patients who do not receive unnecessary ICD therapy are not aware of being spared potential harm, whereas patients in whom their ICD failed to treat life-threatening arrhythmias have their event recorded in detail. The revised recommendations employ the princishould not replace the opinion of the treating physician who has considered the patient's clinical status and desired outcome via a shared clinical decision-making process.
机译:2015年HRS / EHRA / APHRS / SOLAECE专家协商委员会关于最佳植入式CARDIMOVERTER-DEFIBRILLER-DEFIBRILLER-DEFIBRILLER-DECORMMING编程和测试提供了关于BRADYCARDIA编程,心动过速检测,心动过速治疗的指导,以及可植入的心脏病除颤器(ICD)患者治疗的除颤测试。 32项建议代表了撰写本文的共识意见,按类别的建议和证据级别分配。此外,附录B还将这些建议的制造商特定于这些建议的翻译成与母文文件中的建议一致的临床实践。在某些情况下,转换了由一些制造商的设备中进行的研究中获得的质量证据指导的编程,使得该编程在另一个制造商的ICD编程设置中近似。作者发现,除了正式测试的数据虽然没有正式测试,但超出了ICD的特定制造商和模型的强大,一致,宽大。正如预期的那样,由于这些建议代表了平衡风险的战略选择,因此有报告的报告是通过编制的ICDS向附录B建议进行了不利结果。已审查和更新建议以尽量减少此类不利事件。值得注意的是,没有收到不必要的ICD治疗的患者并不意识到被滥用的潜在伤害,而他们的ICD未能治疗危及生命的心律失常的患者将详细记录。修订后的建议雇用普林斯必不可少的意见通过共同的临床决策过程取代考虑患者的临床状况和所需结果的治疗医生。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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