...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology >Left bundle branch area pacing is superior to right ventricular septum pacing concerning depolarization-repolarization reserve
【24h】

Left bundle branch area pacing is superior to right ventricular septum pacing concerning depolarization-repolarization reserve

机译:左束分支区域起搏优于右心室隔膜,关于去极化 - 倒钩储备

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Introduction Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has recently been reported to be a new physiological pacing strategy with clinical feasibility and safety. The present study aims to investigate depolarization-repolarization measures including QT interval, QT dispersion (QTD), and Tpeak-end interval (TpTe) in this novel LBBAP strategy. Methods and Results A total of 131 pacing-indicated patients were prospectively enrolled and randomized to the LBBAP group (n = 66) and right ventricular septum pacing (RVSP) group (n = 65). LBBAP was successfully achieved in 61 subjects with stable lead performance and comparable complications (ie, pocket hematoma, lead perforation, and dislodgement) compared with RVSP. Of the 61 patients with successful LBBAP, the mean LV peak activation time was 67.89 +/- 6.80 ms, with the LBB potential mapped in 46 cases (75.4%). Electrocardiogram (ECG) indices were compared between these two groups before and after implantation. As a result, LBBAP yielded a narrower paced QRS duration (121.49 +/- 9.87 ms vs 145.62 +/- 8.89 ms; P < .001), shorter QT interval (434.16 +/- 32.70 ms vs 462.66 +/- 32.04 ms; P < .001), and QT(c) interval (472.44 +/- 33.30 ms vs 499.65 +/- 31.35 ms; P < .001), lower QTD (40.10 +/- 8.68 ms vs 46.11 +/- 10.85 ms; P = .001), and QT(c)D (43.57 +/- 8.78 ms vs 49.86 +/- 11.98 ms; P = .001), and shorter TpTe (96.59 +/- 10.76 ms vs 103.77 +/- 10.16 ms; P < .001) than RVSP. However, TpTe/QT ratio did not differ between these two groups (0.223 +/- 0.026 vs 0.225 +/- 0.022; P = .733). Furthermore, LBBAP displayed less increased QRS duration, QT(c) interval, QTD, QT(c)D, and a more shortened QT interval compared with RVSP (all P < .05). Conclusion LBBAP proves to be a feasible and safe pacing procedure with better depolarization-repolarization reserve, which may predict lower risk of ventricular arrhythmia and sudden cardiac death.
机译:简介左束分支区域起搏(LBBAP)最近被报告是一种新的生理起搏策略,具有临床可行性和安全性。本研究旨在研究这种新颖的LBBAP策略中包括QT间隔,QT分散(QTD)和TPEAK-ENTEL(TPTE)的去极化 - 复极性措施。方法和结果总共131起起搏指示的患者对LBBAP组(N = 66)和右心室隔膜(RVSP)组(n = 65)进行了术语和随机。与RVSP相比,LBBAP在61项具有稳定的铅性能和相当的并发症(即口袋血肿,铅穿孔和脱裂)中成功实现的。在61例患有LBBAP成功的61名患者中,平均LV峰值活化时间为67.89 +/- 6.80ms,LBB潜力在46例(75.4%)中映射。在植入前后的这两组之间比较了心电图(ECG)指标。结果,LBBAP产生了较窄的节奏QRS持续时间(121.49 +/- 9.87 ms; P <.001),短Qt间隔(434.16 +/- 32.70 ms与462.66 +/-22.04 ms; P <.001)和QT(c)间隔(472.44 +/- 33.30 ms与499.65 +/- 31.35ms; p <.001),下QTD(40.10 +/- 8.68 ms与46.11 +/-10.85 ms; p = .001),Qt(c)d(43.57 +/- 8.78 ms与49.86 +/- 11.98 ms; p = .001),更短的TPTE(96.59 +/- 10.76 ms与103.77 +/- 10.16 ms ; p <.001)比RVSP。然而,这两组之间的TPTE / QT比率在0.2223 +/- 0.026 Vs 0.225 +/- 0.022; p = .733)之间没有差异。此外,与RVSP相比结论LBBAP证明是一种可行和安全的起搏程序,具有更好的去极化 - 倒钩储备,这可能预测室性心律失常和突发性心死的风险。

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