首页> 外文期刊>PACE: Pacing and clinical electrophysiology >Randomized Comparison of J-Shaped Atrial Leads with and without Active Fixation Mechanism.
【24h】

Randomized Comparison of J-Shaped Atrial Leads with and without Active Fixation Mechanism.

机译:带有和不带有主动固定装置的J型心房导线的随机比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: In this prospective, randomized, controlled study, we compared the performance of J-shaped active fixation (AF) atrial leads with J-shaped passive fixation (PF) leads, over a 1-year follow-up period. Methods: A total of 200 consecutive patients were prospectively randomized for implantation with a Medtronic 5568 AF lead model (n = 103; Minneapolis, MN, USA) versus a Medtronic 5592 PF model (n = 97), and all lead-related measurements and complications were recorded over one year. Results: All leads were successfully implanted with a nonsignificant difference in crossover rate to the alternative lead due to failed implantation (1 in the AF and 4 in the PF group, P = NS). Fluoroscopy time during implantation procedure was significantly shorter in the PF group (2.1 +/- 3.6 vs 3.3 +/- 4.5 minute, P < 0.05). Pacing thresholds during implantation were significantly lower in patients with PF leads (0.7 +/- 0.3 V vs 0.9 +/- 0.3 V, P < 0.001) and this difference persisted at 1-year follow-up (0.8 +/-0.6 V vs 1.3 +/- 0.9 V in PF and AF leads respectively, P < 0.05). Lead-related complications occurred in PF and AF with similar frequency (4% and 9% respectively, P = 0.2). However, pericardial complications occurred only in the AF group (6 cases, P = 0.01). Lead dislodgement was observed in only two cases-both in the PF group (P = 0.3). Conclusion: Both types of J-shaped atrial leads had reasonable performance. PF leads required shorter fluoroscopy time for implantation, demonstrated a better pacing threshold over a 1-year follow-up period and had no pericardial complications, while AF lead implantation was complicated by pericardial irritation and/or effusion in 6% cases (P = 0.01).
机译:背景:在这项前瞻性,随机,对照研究中,我们在1年的随访期内比较了J形主动固定(AF)心房导线和J形被动固定(PF)导线的性能。方法:前瞻性地将总共200名连续患者随机分为Medtronic 5568 AF铅模型(n = 103;美国明尼苏达州明尼阿波利斯)和Medtronic 5592 PF模型(n = 97),并进行所有与铅相关的测量和记录了一年以上的并发症。结果:由于植入失败,所有引线均成功植入,与替代引线的交叉率差异不显着(AF组为1,PF组为4,P = NS)。 PF组在植入过程中的透视时间显着缩短(2.1 +/- 3.6分钟vs 3.3 +/- 4.5分钟,P <0.05)。 PF导线患者植入期间的起搏阈值显着降低(0.7 +/- 0.3 V vs 0.9 +/- 0.3 V,P <0.001),并且这种差异在1年随访中持续存在(0.8 +/- 0.6 V vs PF和AF引线分别为1.3 +/- 0.9 V(P <0.05)。铅相关并发症在PF和AF中发生的频率相似(分别为4%和9%,P = 0.2)。但是,心包并发症仅发生在AF组(6例,P = 0.01)。仅在两个病例中观察到了铅移位,在PF组中均如此(P = 0.3)。结论:两种类型的J形心房导线均具有合理的性能。 PF引线需要较短的透视检查时间进行植入,在1年的随访期间起搏阈值更高,且无心包并发症,而AF引线植入则有6%的心包刺激和/或积液(P = 0.01) )。

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