Right ventricular outflow tract placement of defibrillation leads: five year experience

Over a 5-year period, 112 patients (89 male/23 female, mean age 65 years) underwent right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) placement of permanent active-fixation transvenous pacing/defibrillating leads. At implantation, the pacing threshold was 0.6 +/- 0.3 V at 0.5 ms pulse duration and R wave amplitude was 10.9 +/- 4.9 mV. The defibrillation threshold (DFT) of right-sided implants was 17.7 +/- 3.4 J while that of left-sided implants was 16.1 +/- 3.3 J. Patients were followed at 1 and 3 month postimplant and at six-month intervals thereafter. At mean follow-up of 22.5 +/- 17.5 months (range 1-47 months) there were no lead dislodgments, unsuccessful shock therapies, or failure to sense or pace for bradycardia or tachycardia. Death was not sudden in the 17 patients who died. We conclude that RVOT pacing-defibrillation lead implantation is safe, efficacious, and potentially attractive because preliminary evidence suggests that it may not be associated with the adverse hemodynamic effects of pacing at the right ventricular apex.     

Right Ventricular Outflow Tract Septal Pacing: Long-Term Follow-Up of Ventricular Lead Performance

Background: The detrimental effects of right ventricular apical pacing on left ventricular function has driven interest in selective site pacing, predominantly on the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) septum. There is currently no information on long-term ventricular lead electrical performance from this site.
Methods: A total of 100 patients with ventricular lead placement on the RVOT septum undergoing pacemaker implantation for bradycardia indications were analyzed retrospectively. Lead positioning was confirmed with the use of fluoroscopy. Long-term (1 year) follow-up was obtained in 92 patients. Information on stimulation threshold, R-wave sensing, lead impedance, and lead complications were collected.
Results: Lead performance at the RVOT septal position was stable in the long term. Ventricular electrical parameters were acceptable with stable long-term stimulation thresholds, sensing, and impedance for all lead types. One-year results demonstrated mean stimulation threshold of 0.71 ± 0.25 V, mean R wave of 12.4 ± 6.05 mV, and mean impedance values of 520 ± 127 Ω. There were no cases of high pacing thresholds or inadequate sensing.
Conclusions: This study confirms satisfactory long-term performance with leads placed on the RVOT septum, comparable to traditional pacing sites. It is now time to undertake studies to examine the long-term hemodynamic effects of RVOT septal pacing.     

First Derivative of Right Ventricular Pressure, dP/dt, as a Sensor for a Rate Adaptive VVI Pacemaker: Initial Experience

Ten patients underwent implantation of a rate adaptive ventricular pacing system with a new pulse generator and lead. The unipolar lead has a steroid eluting tip and a pressure sensor. The first derivative of the signal from this sensor, dP/dt, is determined and the pacemaker rate is varied in response to changes in the right ventricular dP/dtMAX. During implantation, dP/dt values were in the range of 180-720 mm Hg/sec. The autothreshold for pacing at 2.5 V remained unchanged 1 month after implantation (0.065 +/- 0.045 msec, range 0.05-2.00 msec) and only slightly increased after 3 months (0.075 +/- 0.045 msec, range 0.05-2.00 msec). A significant correlation existed between the dP/dt measured during implantation and the right ventricular pressure measured by telemetry at follow-up visits (r = 0.93, P = 0.0001). Initial pacemaker programming was performed on the second day after implantation following a short walk and was adjusted subsequent to follow-up visits according to the patient's subjective assessment and in accordance with the results of exercise tests and Holter monitoring. Exercise and Holter tests did not significantly change initial programming. There was a significant correlation between right ventricular systolic pressure and the rate response setting (r = -0.66, P less than 0.05). During dP/dt pacing, all patients felt well, and eight of these reported an improvement compared to nonrate adaptive pacing. The heart rate response to effort and recovery was appropriate. It was concluded that: (1) right ventricular dP/dt is a suitable parameter for controlling the pacing rate; (2) appropriate programming of the dP/dt pacemaker results in a suitable heart rate response to exercise and recovery.     

Long-term performance of active-fixation pacing leads: a prospective study

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasingly widespread use of active-fixation leads, long-term clinical follow-up of pacing lead outcomes is lacking. The aim was to analyze pacing parameters over a 2-year follow-up. We performed a prospective observational study of consecutive new pacemaker implants using the 1488T St. Jude (100) and the Medtronic 5076 (100) active-fixation leads. Detailed analysis of pacing parameters was collected at implant, day 1, and 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred patients underwent implantation of 100 dual-chamber pacemakers. Initial pacing parameters in the ventricle were threshold 0.7 +/- 0.2 V, R wave 12.0 +/- 6.5 mV, and impedance 879 +/- 224 Omega. Threshold increased significantly from day 1 (0.7 +/- 0.2 V) to month 1 (0.9 +/- 0.6 V, P < 0.01) and remained stable over the long term. Four of the 100 patients had a threshold >2 V (mean 3.3 +/- 0.9 V) all between day 1 and month 3. For all patients, R wave remained stable, but impedance declined significantly from day 1 (879 +/- 184 Omega) to month 1 (677 +/- 122 Omega, P < 0.01). There were no ventricular lead complications. Initial pacing parameters in the atrium were threshold 0.9 +/- 0.3 V, P wave 3.3 +/- 2.4 mV, and impedance 606 +/- 144 Omega. Threshold remained stable over the long-term follow-up. One of 100 patients had a rise in threshold >2 V (2.2 V) between day 1 and month 1. No patients underwent lead repositioning. Sensing and impedance remained stable over the long term. Patient follow-up was completed in 94% (6 unrelated deaths). There was an 8% incidence of atrial fibrillation. CONCLUSION: Active-fixation leads are generally associated with stable long-term pacing parameters.     

Five-Year Follow-Up of a Bipolar Steroid-Eluting Ventricular Pacing Lead

Steroid-eluting pacing leads are known to attenuate the threshold peaking early after implantation. Long-term performance, however, is not yet settled. The lead design tested in this prospective study combines a 5.8-mm2 tip of microporous platinum-iridium with elution of 1.0 mg of dexamethasone sodium phosphate and tines for passive fixation (model 5024, Medtronic Inc.). In 50 patients (mean age 69 +/- 10 years), the electrode was implanted in the right ventricular apex. Follow-up was performed on days 0, 2, 5, 10, 28, 90, 180 and every 6 months thereafter for 5-years postimplant. At each visit, pacing thresholds were determined as pulse duration (ms) at 1.0 V and as the minimum charge (microC) delivered for capture. Lead impedance (omega) was telemetered at 2.5 V-0.50 ms, and sensing thresholds (mV) were measured in triplicate using the automatic sensing threshold algorithm of the pacemaker implanted (model 294-03, Intermedics Inc.). On the day of implantation, mean values were 0.10 +/- 0.03 ms, 0.12 +/- 0.03 microC, 758 +/- 131 omega, and 13.1 +/- 1.8 mV, respectively. Beyond 1-year postimplant, pacing thresholds did not vary significantly. Sensing thresholds and lead impedance values were stable during long-term follow-up. Five years after implantation, mean values were 0.23 +/- 0.11 ms, 0.24 +/- 0.07 microC, 670 +/- 139 omega, and 11.6 +/- 3.1 mV for pulse width and charge threshold, lead impedance, and sensing threshold, respectively, and all leads captured at 1.0 V with the longest pulse duration available (1.50 ms). It is concluded that the bipolar steroid-eluting tined ventricular lead showed stable stimulation thresholds, lead impedance values, and sensing thresholds for 5 years after implantation.     

Hemodynamic Benefits of Right Ventricular Outflow Tract Pacing: Comparison with Right Ventricular Apex Pacing

To assess optimal hemodynamics in relation to stimulation site during right ventricular pacing, 17 consecutive patients who underwent cardiac catheterization were studied. In all patients, right ventricular apex and right ventricular outflow tract stimulation was performed at 85, 100, and 120 beats/min. Cardiac index at both pacing sites was compared using the left ventricular outflow tract continuous wave Doppler technique. Comparison of the two stimulation sites demonstrated that right ventricular outflow tract pacing resulted in a higher cardiac index at 85 beats/min (2.42 ± 1.2 vs 2.04 ±1.0 L/min per m², P < 0.002) at 100 beats/min (2.78 ± 1.4 vs 2.35 ± 1.1 L/min perm², P < 0.001) and 120 beats/min (3.00 ± 1.5 vs 2.61 ± 0.9 L/min perm², P < 0.001). From a total of 51 paired observations, 45 showed an increase in cardiac index during outflow tract pacing as compared to apex pacing. Right ventricular outflow tract pacing at 120 beats/min resulted in a lower cardiac index than right ventricular apex pacing in patients with significant coronary artery disease and/or impaired left ventricular function (ejection fraction ≤ 50%), whereas right ventricular outflow tract pacing produced higher cardiac indices in the absence of these abnormalities. Right ventricular outflow tract pacing resulted in higher cardiac indices as compared to apex pacing in all other subgroups at all other pacing sites tested. It is concluded that stimulation of the right ventricular outflow tract offers a significant hemodynamic benefit during single chamber pacing as compared to conventional apex pacing, particularly in the absence of significant coronary artery disease and/or left ventricular dysfunction.     

Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Atrioventricular Pacing at Differing Sites in the Right Ventricle Individually and Simultaneously

We hypothesized that pacing, which provided a rapid uniform contraction of the ventricles with a narrower QRS, would produce a better stroke volume and cardiac output (CO). We sought to study whether pacing simultaneously at two sites in the right ventricle (right ventricular apex and outflow tract) would provide a narrower QRS and improved CO in 11 patients undergoing elective electrophysiology studies. Patients were studied by transthoracic echocardiography measurement of CO using the Doppler flow velocity method in normal sinus rhythm, AOO pacing (rate 80), DOO pacing in the right ventricular apex (AV delay 100 ms). DOO pacing in the right ventricular outflow tract, and DOO pacing at both right ventricular sites simultaneously in random order. The COs were 5.42 ± 1.83, 5.61 ± 1.97. 5.67 ± 1.6. 5.84 ± 1.68. and 5.86 ± 1.52 L/min, respectively (no significant difference by repeated measures analysis of variance [ANOVA]). The QRS durations were 0.09 ± 0.02, 0.09 ± 0.02. 0.13 ± 0.027, 0.13 ± 0.03, and 0.11 ± 0.03 sees respectively. Repeated measures ANOVA showed that the QRS duration significantly increased with right ventricular apex or right ventricluar outflow tract pacing compared to sinus rhythm and AOO pacing (P < 0.001) but then diminished with pacing at both sites (P < 0.01). QRS duration was not correlated with CO, however the change in QRS duration correlated significantly with the change in CO when pacing was performed at the two right ventricular sites simultaneoasly. In conclusion, during DOO pacing, there was a trend for pacing in the right ventricular outflow tract or both sites to improve the CO compared to the right ventricular apex. With simultaneous pacing at both ventricular sites, the QRS narrowed. Further studies will be required to see if this approach has value in patients with poor left ventricular function or congestive heart failure.     

Acute and Chronic Cycle Length Dependent Increase in Ventricular Pacing Threshold

Several factors have been shown to influence ventricuJar pacing threshold in humans, including pacing lead location (endocardial vs epicardial), lead maturation, and antiarrhythmic agents. To determine whether ventricuJar pacing rate has a significant influence on acute and chronic pacing thresholds, we measured pacing thresholds in 16 patients receiving an implantafaleantitachycardia pacemaker cardioverter defibrillator (Cadence?). Ventricular pacing thresholds were determined using the device programmer at cycle lengths of GOO, 400, and 300 msec at the time of implantation; prior to hospital discharge at 3-14 days; and during follow-up outpatient visits at 6-8 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months to 1 year. Eleven patients had an epicardial lead system and five an endocardial lead system. Eleven patients were being treated with antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Device output ranged from 1-10 V and was adjustable in 1-V increments (pulse width was held constant at 1 msec). A cycle length dependent increase in pacing threshold (defined as a ≤ 1-V increase in threshold at 400 or 300 msec relative to 600 msecj was observed in 10/16 patients during 12/72 pacing trials at 400 msec, and in 15/16 patients during 31/67 trials at 300 msec. In trials in which an increase in pacing threshold occurred, the magnitude of the increase at 400 msec relative to 600 msec was only 1 V in all 12 trials, but at 300 msec the increase ranged from 4–9 V in 7/31 (23%) trials. There was an equal percentage (67%) of patients demonstrating a cycle length dependent increase in threshold with measurements made at the time of device implantation and at the 6 month to 1 year follow-up period. Two-way analysis of variance showed a significant effect of cycle length and time from implantation on mean pacing thresholds at the three cycle lengths. In conclusion, a cycle length dependent increase in pacing threshold occurred in virtually all patients during follow-up of up to 12 months and, thus, its presence was independent of lead location, presence of antiarrhythmic agents, and the state of lead maturation. These findings suggest that pacing thresholds measured at rates just above the sinus rate may not always apply to the faster rates utilized for antitachycardia pacing and indicates the need for threshold measurement at the designed pacing rate.     

Feasibility Of Temporary Biventricular Pacing In Patients With Reduced Left Ventricular Function After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Background and Methods: Biventricular pacing improves hemodynamics after weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass in patients with severely reduced left ventricular (LV) function undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We examined the feasibility of temporary biventricular pacing for 96 hours postoperatively. Unipolar epicardial wires were placed on the roof of the right atrium (RA), the right ventricular (RV) outflow tract, and the LV free lateral wall and connected to an external pacing device in 51 patients (mean LV ejection fraction 35 ± 4%). Pacing and sensing thresholds, lead survival and incidence of pacemaker dysfunction were determined.
Results: Atrial and RV pacing thresholds increased significantly by the 4th postoperative day, from 1.6 ± 0.2 to 2.5 ± 0.3 V at 0.5 ms (P = 0.03) at the RA, 1.4 ± 0.3 V to 2.7 ± 0.4 mV (P = 0.01) at the RV, and 1.9 ± 0.6 V to 2.9 ± 0.7 mV (P = 0.3) at the LV, while sensing thresholds decreased from 2.0 ± 0.2 to 1.7 ± 0.2 mV (P = 0.18) at the RA, 7.2 ± 0.8 to 5.1 ± 0.7 mV (P = 0.05) at the RV, and 9.4 ± 1.3 to 5.5 ± 1.1 mV (P = 0.02) at the LV. The cumulative overall incidence of lead failure was 24% by the 4th postoperative day, and was similar at the RV and LV. We observed no ventricular proarrhythmia due to pacing or temporary pacemaker malfunction.
Conclusions: Biventricular pacing after CABG using a standard external pacing system was feasible and safe.     

Left ventricular lead insertion using a modified transseptal catheterization technique: A totally endocardial approach for permanent biventricular pacing in end-stage heart failure

This article describes a new technique of LV lead insertion, using transseptal catheterization performed through the right internal jugular vein, to obtain a totally endocardial biventricular chronic pacing in end-stage heart failure. Three patients with QRS widening (> 180 ms) linked to complete left bundle branch block (n = 2) or right ventricular pacing (n = 1) were included in this preliminary study. Catheterization was performed under fluoroscopy and transesophageal echocardiography guidance. Transseptal catheterization was achieved by puncture of the right internal jugular vein at the base of the neck and by using a Brockenbrough needle, the tip curve of which was more curved than the standard model. A flexible long sheath was advanced in the left atrium through the interatrial septum and then a unipolar electrode was placed easily in the LV. The proximal tip of the LV lead was tunneled from the neck to the subclavian area and connected to the ventricular channel of a dual (n = 1) or simple (n = 2) chamber pacemaker. Efficient acute sensing (V wave amplitude = 13 +/- 3 m V) and pacing (acute pacing threshold = 0. 7 +/- 0.4 V) were obtained in the three patients. Early loss of capture occurred in two patients requiring lead replacement. Functional status dramatically improved in all three patients. At 6-month follow-up, biventricular pacing was maintained in all patients (mean threshold 1.4 V) who were free of clinical embolic event with oral anticoagulation therapy. This modified technique of jugular transseptal catheterization appears promising for the development of left heart pacing.     

Comparison of mid-term clinical experience with steroid-eluting active and passive fixation ventricular electrodes in children

Although active fixation ventricular leads seem to have advantages over passive fixation leads, this study compares the follow-up results of active and passive fixation leads in children. We evaluated the implantation and follow-up data of 41 children with active (Accufix II DEC, group 1) (n = 20) or passive (Membrane E, group 2) (n = 21) fixation, steroid-eluting ventricular leads. All but one of the patients in group 1 completed the 12-month follow-up. The mean follow-up period in group 2 was 10.4 +/- 2.9 months (range 3-12 months, median 12 months). In both groups the mean pacing threshold was measured as 0.51 +/- 0.09 V versus 0.48 +/- 0.15 V (P > 0.05) at 0.5-ms pulse width, mean R wave amplitude as 9.9 +/- 2.5 mV versus 9.4 +/- 3.2 mV (P > 0.05), and mean impedance as 557 +/- 92 omega versus 664 +/- 160 omega (P < 0.05), respectively, at implantation. After the first week of pacing, mean threshold values in group 1 were significantly lower than those of group 2 (P < 0.01 and P < 0.05, respectively). During the follow-up period, lead impedance measurements did not show a significant difference between the two groups. In one patient from group 1, the lead (by unscrewing) was removed easily because of pacemaker pocket infection. No lead dislodgement or helix deformation occurred in group 1. Nevertheless, in one patient from group 2, the lead was extracted at 4-month postimplantation because of lead displacement. We conclude that the steroid-eluting active fixation lead (Accufix II DEC) have advantages of easier implantation and lower acute and chronic stimulation thresholds compared to the passive fixation lead (Membrane E). Therefore, Accufix II DEC is superior to Membrane E, and it is a better first choice in children with an implanted single chamber ventricular pacemaker.     

Rapid decline in acute stimulation thresholds with steroid-eluting active-fixation pacing leads

BACKGROUND AND AIM: There is an increasing use of active-fixation leads for cardiac pacing, yet concerns remain regarding initial high stimulation thresholds. The aim was to perform a detailed analysis of pacing parameters at the time of implantation to determine when lead repositioning should be considered. METHODS: We performed a prospective observational study of consecutive new pacemaker implants. Detailed analysis of pacing parameters was collected at 2-minute intervals for 10 minutes, and at day 1 and week 8 following implant. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients underwent implantation of 79 dual-chamber and 15 single-chamber pacemakers using active-fixation leads in both chambers. An initial threshold of >1 V was demonstrated in 45/94 (48%) ventricular leads (mean threshold 1.5 +/- 0.3 V). This declined rapidly to 0.9 +/- 0.3 V at 4 minutes (P < 0.01), 0.7 +/- 0.3 V at 10 minutes (P < 0.01), and 0.6 +/- 0.3 V at day 1 (P < 0.01). At day 1, 43/45 leads were <1 V. There were 79 atrial leads. An initial threshold of >1 V (mean 1.7 +/- 0.6 V) was demonstrated in 41/79 (52%) leads falling significantly to 1.1 +/- 0.5 V at 4 minutes (P < 0.01), 0.9 +/- 0.4 V at 10 minutes (P < 0.01), and 0.6 +/- 0.2 V at day 1 (P < 0.01). At 10 minutes, 32 of 41 leads demonstrated a threshold of <1 V with all leads <1 V at day 1. Thresholds were maintained medium term. CONCLUSIONS: Active-fixation leads are commonly associated with initially high thresholds that fall rapidly. An initial threshold of 2 V should be provisionally accepted and retested at 4 minutes. The majority will have a threshold of <1 V the following day. A failure of a high threshold to decline at 4 minutes requires lead repositioning.     

A Comparison of Platinized Grooved Electrode Performance with Ring-Tip Electrodes

One of the determinants of the capture threshold of an endocardial pacing lead is the configuration of the electrode tip. To evaluate whether micro- and macroporous electrodes have better initial and chronic thresholds than nonporous electrodes, acute and chronic capture thresholds, stimulation impedance and sensing thresholds were determined in 22 patients in whom a ventricular ring-tip electrode and a unipolar, dual chamber pacemaker with bidirectional telemetry had been implanted. These values were compared to those obtained from 25 patients receiving an electrode constructed with a platinized groove surface at the time of implant of an identical pulse generator. The ventricular capture threshold at implant was 0.7 V +/- 0.3 at 0.6 msec pulse width for both groups. The capture threshold was significantly greater in the ring tip electrode group at follow-up periods of 1 month (1.1 V +/- 0.5 vs 1.6 V +/- 0.6, P less than 0.008), 4 months (1.0 V +/- 0.2 vs 1.7 V +/- 0.8, P less than 0.002), and 10 months (1.2 V +/- 0.4 vs 1.7 V +/- 0.5, P less than 0.04) following implantation. The stimulation impedance at the time of implantation was lower in the ring-tip electrode group (530 ohms vs 603 ohms, P less than 0.03), but thereafter no significant difference was seen between the two groups. The acute and chronic sensing thresholds were similar in both groups. While the microporous electrode had significantly lower chronic capture thresholds, the magnitude of this difference is small, and probably clinically inconsequential.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Atrial Stimulation by Means of Floating Electrodes: A Multicenter Experience

It is well established that single lead VDD pacing is a physiological, reliable, and easy to use mode of pacing. The major limitation of VDD pacing is the need of a normal sinus node function, confirming its indication to patients with isolated atrioventricular conduction disturbances. The Phymos 830 pacing lead was originally designed for VDD pacing in association with the Phymos MPS pulse generator; it has a floating atrial dipole with an interelectrode distance of 3 cm; the distal electrode is 11, 13, or 15 cm proximal to the tip. As a result of the incidental observation of atrial captures occurring at very low pulse amplitudes delivered from the floating dipole of this lead, a 13-center Italian study was initiated to test the systematic feasibility of this type of atrial pacing. Pacing parameters were set and strength-duration curves were acquired with the PSA Master 470 external device. The investigation was performed at pacemaker implant in 114 patients in the supine position. The tip of the electrode was positioned at the right ventricular apex and the atrial dipole at the site of the highest endocavitary signal. Atrial bipolar pacing was performed with the proximal electrode as the cathode. Stable atrial capture was obtained in 108 of 114 patients (94.7%); pacing threshold was < 3.5 V with a pulse width of 1 msec in 85 of 108 patients. Results of voltage threshold were: 2,99 ± 1.25 and 2.59 ± 1.13 V at pulse widths of 0.5 and 1 msec, respectively. The mean value of atrial pacing impedance (5 V, 1 msec) was 601.2 ± 221 Ohm; the mean value of the endocavitary signal amplitude was 1.53 ± 0.48 mV. During deep breathing loss of capture was observed in only 8.3% of patients; these patients regularly had an atrial pacing threshold higher than 3.5 V. Diaphragmatic stimulation occurred in 19.2% of patients at an output of 5 V and 1 msec. Our results suggest that stable atrial pacing is possible with floating electrodes in a high percentage of patients; in 85/114 patients (74.5%) atrial capture was reliable at a satisfactory mean pacing threshold. This experience shows that single lead DDD pacing is possible and may be reliable in acute conditions; and supports the availability of this pacing mode in selected patients. It can be considered a starting point for improvements in techniques and materials.     

Nonthoracotomy Implantation of Cardioverter Defibrillators: Preliminary Experience with a Defibrillation Lead Placed at the Right Ventricular Outflow Tract

Although morbidity and mortality associated with defibrillator implantation using a nonthoracotomy approach have decreased as compared with a thoracotomy approach, dfifihrillation thresholds have been higher and fewer patients satisfied implan t criteria. It may be possible to improve on the success of nonthoracotomy defibrillator implantation by the placement of a right ventricular (HV) outflow defibrillation lead. Implnntable car-dioverter defibrillator implantation data of 30 consecutive patients with clinical VT or VF were reviewed. Three defibrillation leads were routinely used. When either pacing threshold at the RV apex ivas inadequate (n - 2) or 18-J shocks were not successful in terminating VF in 3 of 4 trials (n = 8). the RV apex lead was positioned to the HV outflow tract attaching to the septum. Defibrillation testing was first performed with the RV apex lead in combination with CS, SVC. and/or subcutaneous leads. Twenty patients satisfied implant criteria with a defibrillation threshold of 13.5 ± 3.6 J. In 7 of the 10 patients, whose RV lead was repositioned to the RV outflow tract, this lead in combination with SVC, CS, or subcutaneous leads produced successful defibrillation at < 18 J or in 3 of 4 trials. This approach improved the overall success of nonthoracotomy implantation of defibrillators from 69% to 90%, After a follow-up of 27 ± 6 months, there was no dislodgment of the HV outflow tract defibrillation leads. Conclusions: This article reports the preliminary observation that placement of defibrillation leads to the RV outflow tract in humans was possible and without dislodgment. RV outflow tract offers an alternative for placement of defibrillation leads, which may improve on the success of nonthoracotomy defibrillator implantation.     

右心室流出道高位间隔部起搏的应用及护理

目的 探讨主动固定电极行右心室流出道高位间隔部起搏的可行性及护理对策.方法 40例需起搏器植入的患者,采用VVI起搏模式,将其随机分为右心室流出道高位间隔部起搏组（RVOTHS组）和右心室心尖部起搏组（RVA组）各20例,观察两组在术中及术后的各项参数以及护理对策.结果 两组患者均顺利完成手术,两组各1例术后发生电极脱位.全部手术无严重并发症出现.RVOTHS组手术曝光时间明显延长,两组比较差异有统计学意义（t=4.036,P＜0.01）.术中两组患者心室的起搏阈值、感知阈值和电极阻抗比较差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）,RVOTHS组起搏心电图QRS波宽度较RVA组变窄,但差异无统计学意义（t=1.613,P＞0.05）.结论 右心室流出道高位间隔部起搏是安全和可行的,术后护理重视心电监测及个性化护理,可使并发症的发生率大大降低.     

Importance of the Site of Ventricular Tachycardia Origin on Left Ventricular Hemodynamics in Humans

Experimental animal data have indicated that the site of ventricular tachycardia origin and, hence, the degree of asynchronous contraction, may influence the hemodynamic tolerance during sustained ventricular tachycardia. However, data in man are scarce. We studied patients with preserved left ventricular function and absence of significant coronary artery disease. Ventricular tachycardia was simulated with rapid pacing (at 120 and 150 beats/min), performed randomly, from the right ventricular apex or the right ventricular outflow tract. Following pacing from one site, it was repeated from the alternate site. Compared to outflow tract pacing, QRS duration was significantly longer during rapid pacing from the apex. Left ventricular pressure was recorded using a micromanometer-tipped catheter. During sinus rhythm, peak systolic pressure was 142 ± 14 mmHg: at 120 beats/min, it decreased to 109 ± 12 mmHg during pacing from the apex and to 127 ± 21 mmHg during pacing from the outflow tract (P = 0.008). This difference diminished at 150 beats/min (101 ± 16 mmHg vs 112 ± 16 mmHg, respectively, P = 0.21). During sinus rhythm end-diastolic pressure was 13 ± 1 mmHg, which did not change significantly during pacing at 120 beats/min. During pacing at 150 beats/min, end-diastolic pressure increased to 21 ± 3 mmHg during pacing from the apex and to 16 ± 2 mmHg during pacing from the outflow tract (P = 0.005). Changes in first derivative of pressure and in isovolumic relaxation time constant were comparable during pacing from the two sites. Thus, it seems that tachycardias originating from the right ventricular outflow tract result in more favorable left ventricular hemodynamics, compared to those from the right ventricular apex     

临时心脏起搏器对心肺复苏后新发心房颤动的影响

目的探讨临时起搏器对心肺复苏后出现新发心房颤动的影响。方法回顾成功心肺复苏后出现长RR间期并行临时心脏起搏术患者106例,根据长RR间期的心电图表现分为起搏点异常组50例和传导阻滞组56例,然后又根据起搏部位不同分为心尖部起搏组和右心室流出道起搏组。所有患者起搏模式均为VVI起搏。观测7d分析心房颤动发生情况。结果心房颤动总发生率为17．0％（18／106）,起搏点异常组30例行心尖部起搏,心房颤动发生率为36．7％（11／30）,20例行右心室流出道起搏,心房颤动发生率为5％（1／20）。心尖起搏组心房颤动发生率高于右心室流出道起搏组（36．7％ vs．5％,P〈0．05）;传导阻滞组32例行心尖部起搏,心房颤动发生率为18．8％（6／32）,24例行右心室流出道起搏,心房颤动发生率为0％（0／24）,心尖起搏组心房颤动发生率高于右心室流出道起搏组（18．8％粥．0％,P〈0．05）。通过Logistic回归分析后,心房颤动发生与右心室心尖起搏相关。结论心肺复苏后无论是起搏点异常还是传导异常行临时起搏器治疗,右心室流出道起搏有利于减少心房颤动的发生。     

The Safety and Efficacy of Chronic Ventricular Pacing at 1.6 Volts Using a Steroid Eluting Lead

Steroid eluting leads may allow for lower chronic pacing thresholds and therefore lower pacing outputs. Twenty-two patients (15 presenting with syncope) were implanted with VVI or VVIR pacemakers and transvenous steroid eluting leads and followed for a mean of 20.6 months while being paced at 1.6 V and 0.6 msec. Mean acute voltage pacing thresholds were 0.40 V at 0.5 msec and chronic pulse width thresholds were 0.21 msec at 0.8 V. Pacemaker function was documented with one to three 24-hour Holter monitors, attached during the 2-6 week postimplant period, bimonthly transtelephonic monitoring, and monthly pacemaker clinic visits. No patient developed recurrent symptoms and consistent capture was verified in all patients on every 24-hour Holter recording and transtelephonic monitor. Chronic ventricular pacing at an output of 1.6 V at 0.6 msec is safe and effective when using a steroid eluting lead and potentially has implications for pacemaker longevity.     

European clinical experience with a dual chamber single pass sensing and pacing defibrillation lead

Dual chamber ICDs are increasingly implanted nowadays, mainly to improve discrimination between supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias but also to maintain AV synchrony in patients with bradycardia. The aim of this study was to investigate a new single pass right ventricular defibrillation lead capable of true bipolar sensing and pacing in the right atrium and integrated bipolar sensing and pacing in the right ventricle. The performance of the lead was evaluated in 57 patients (age 61 +/- 12 years; New York Heart Association 1.9 +/- 0.6, left ventricular ejection fraction 0.38 +/- 0.15) at implant, at prehospital discharge, and during a 1-year follow-up. Sensing and pacing behavior of the lead was evaluated in six different body positions. In four patients, no stable position of the atrial electrode could intraoperatively be found. The intraoperative atrial sensing was 2.3 +/- 1.6 mV and the atrial pacing threshold 0.8 +/- 0.5 V at 0.5 ms. At follow-up, the atrial sensing ranged from 1.5 mV to 2.2 mV and the atrial pacing threshold product from 0.8 to 1.7 V/ms. In 11 patients, an intermittent atrial sensing problem and in 24 patients an atrial pacing dysfunction were observed in at least one body position. In 565 episodes, a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 96.5% were found for ventricular arrhythmias. In conclusion, this single pass defibrillation lead performed well as a VDD lead and for dual chamber arrhythmia discrimination. However, loss of atrial capture in 45% of patients preclude its use in patients depending on atrial pacing.