心房起搏脉冲传导延迟一例

患者女性 ,40岁 ,因病窦综合征置入起搏器 ,配用IS 1BI双极心房 /心室电极 ,心房电极于右心耳起搏时参数较好 ,但电极难以固定 ,无SP间期 (起搏脉冲至P波的时限 )延长 ;于是行右房上部起搏 ,发生起搏脉冲传导延迟 (SP间期 14 0ms)。术后起搏器工作正常 ,SP间期为 10 0ms。产生其SP延迟的原因不太明确。     

双房同步起搏预防和治疗房性快速性心律失常

目的 观察双房同步起搏技术对伴有房间传导阻滞的阵发性快速性房性心律失常的疗效。方法 病态窦房结综合征合并房间传导阻滞的阵发性快速性房性心律失常患者7例，男4例、女3例，年龄58～78岁。其中4例行双房起搏(AAT)，3例行双房右室三腔起搏(DDD)，经穿刺左锁骨下静脉插入右房、右室和冠状静脉窦起搏电极导线，分别用于起搏右房、右室和左房。结果 起搏器及电极导线均顺利植入，未发生任何并发症。冠状静脉窦电极顶端距冠状静脉窦口2．5—3．5cm，P波振幅为1．6—5．5mV、阻抗624—808Ω,、单极起搏阈值0．5—0．7V。随访2—31个月，7例均健在，房性心律失常的临床发作得到明显控制。结论：双房同步起搏技术是房间传导阻滞合并快速房性心律失常的有效预防和治疗方法。     

双房起搏对房性快速性心律失常的治疗

目的 :评价双房起搏治疗伴房间传导阻滞 (IACB)患者的阵发性房性快速性心律失常的疗效和安全性。方法 :15例患者均行左锁骨下静脉穿刺 ,X线采用正位和左前斜位 ,依次置入冠状窦、右室、右房电极 ,测试起搏参数满意后 ,经Y型转接器将冠状窦电极和右房电极组成新的双极电极 ,置入后分别行AAT、DDD或DDTA起搏。结果 :1例术中冠状窦电极脱位而放弃双房起搏 ,2例术后冠状窦电极脱位 ,均成功复位 ,2例由于程控不当造成起搏器介导性心动过速 ,其余病例未出现并发症。随访 2～ 32个月 ,9例显效 (6 4 .3% ) ,2例有效 ,3例无效。结论 :双房起搏能有效防治并发高度房间传导阻滞患者的阵发性心房扑动、心房颤动。普通心室电极经冠状窦行永久左房起搏安全、有效、脱位率低 ,值得推广和应用     

双房同步起搏技术的临床应用

双房同步起搏是恢复双房电活动同步化的一种新的起搏技术,可防治快速房性心律紊乱。笔者对１７例房内、房间传导阻滞并快速房性心律失常患者进行双房同步起搏治疗,１４例行三腔起搏（ＤＤＤ）、３例行双房起搏（ＡＡＩ）,冠状静脉窦电极均经左锁骨下静脉途径放置。起搏器及电极导线均顺利植入,未发现脱位、穿孔等并发症。冠状静脉窦电极导线顶端电极测定的Ｐ波振幅为５．６９±２．６３（２．４～９．６）ｍＶ、起搏阻抗６５５±１９４．１１（５２０～９６０）Ω、单极起搏阈值０．９２±０．６８（０．４～２．２）Ｖ。冠状静脉窦电极位置较深,则测得起搏阈值较低。随访８．６（３～１５）个月,１例猝死、１６例健在;其预防心房扑动、颤动的显效率达６２．５％、有效率达８１．２５％。结论：双房同步起搏技术是房间传导阻滞合并房性心动过速,心房扑动、颤动的有效治疗和预防方法。     

双房起搏治疗快速性房性心律失常的疗效探讨

目的：探讨具有自动模式转换功能（AMS）的DDD起搏器进行双房三腔心脏起搏治疗房内传导阻滞并快速性房心律失常患者的疗效及随访要求。方法：对2例例患者植Medtronic THERA DR7964iDDD起搏器,进行双房－右室三腔起搏治疗,定期起搏器程控和Holter复查了解近期及远期起搏各参数变化、起搏与自身心律的关系及对房性心律失常影响。结果：2例阵发房颤、房扑者、房颤发作明显减少,双房－右室近期及远期起搏阈值测定良好,起搏器AMS发挥正常,但起搏程控检测冠状窦电极参数受限并且起搏器自动模式转换详情观察具有一定局限性。结论：双房心脏起搏器能有效地治疗因房内传导阻滞引起的快速房性心律失常;AMS的DDD起搏器适用于具有快速房性心律失常的双房心脏起搏患者,为了更好地观察冠状窦电极的稳定性及更确工判断该起搏术对快速房心律失常的疗效,有待使用新型的转换器,并进一步探讨起搏器的连接方式。     

双心房同步起搏技术治疗快速性房性心律失常5例报告

目的　研究应用双心房同步起搏技术治疗由房间传导阻滞引起的快速房性心律失常的作用。方法　 5例病人应用双心房同步起搏技术 ,其中 3例行三腔起搏 (双心房 +右心室 ) ,2例行双心房起搏 ( AAT)。冠状动脉窦电极均经锁骨下静脉放置 ,起搏器及电极导线均顺利植入 ,无脱位及穿孔等并发症。 5例冠状窦电极平均参数为 :P波振幅 4.5± 2 .6 8m V,起搏阻抗 880± 2 0 4.11Ω ,起搏阈值 0 .5 8± 0 .37V。结果　随访 2～ 12个月 ,除 1例需调整参数后不再复发外 ,其余 4例术后均无房性心律失常发生。结论　双心房同步起搏技术是治疗与预防房内、房间传导阻滞引起的房性快速性心律失常的有效方法     

经右房间隔下部-右室心尖部行DDD起搏治疗顽固性起搏器综合征一例

患者男性 ,5 8岁 ,18年前因病窦综合征行VVI起搏器置入 ,后因电极脱位而自成AAI起搏 ,于 1年前更换起搏器时 ,心房电极因阻抗过高 ,再次置入心房电极不能起搏而改为VVI起搏 ,术后出现起搏器综合征。经电生理检查 ,证实右房上部无A波 ,冠状窦口可记录到A波 ,并可行心房起搏。右室起搏时为室房 1∶1逆传 ,此为起搏器综合征的机制。故保留原右室电极 ,于冠状窦口加心房螺旋电极固定 ,DDD起搏成功 ,起搏器综合征消失。     

不同部位起搏对阵发性心房颤动患者心房激动时间的影响

目的　比较右心耳 (RAA)、冠状窦远端 (DCS)、右心房双部位 (右心耳加冠状窦口 ,DSA)和双房 (右心耳加冠状窦远端 ,Bi A)起搏对阵发性心房颤动 (PAf)患者心房激动时间的影响。方法 2 2例接受心脏电生理评价试验的PAf患者在窦性心律下行心房不同部位起搏 ,同步记录 12导心电图 ,测量最大 P波时限。结果　与窦性 P波时限相比 ,RAA起搏明显延长 P波时限 (P<0 .0 1) ,DCS、DSA及 Bi A起搏则明显缩短 P波时限 (P<0 .0 1,P<0 .0 1,P<0 .0 1)。结论　 DCS、DSA及 Bi A起搏明显缩短心房激动时间 ,减少心房电活动的离散度 ,有利于 PAf的防治。     

双房同步起搏联合预防心房颤动的起搏治疗模式治疗快速房性心律失常的临床应用(附三例报告)

为观察三腔双房起搏联合预防心房颤动 (简称房颤 )的起搏治疗模式治疗快速性房性心律失常的临床效果。研究 3例房间传导阻滞合并快速性房性心律失常 ,并置入三腔双房同步起搏器的患者。起搏器具有房颤预防治疗功能。左房起搏通过冠状静脉窦置入 2 188电极导线 ,左右心房电极导线通过Y形转接器与双腔起搏器连接。DDTA起搏模式 ,随访 6个月 ,观察超驱动起搏、长间期抑制、房性早搏 (简称房早 )后加速起搏功能关闭和开启时 ,患者的临床症状、统计模式转换发生的次数、第一次至第二次房颤发作的间期、平均 2 4h房早记数。结果 :双房同步起搏后 ,患者快速房性心律失常的发作明显减少。超驱动起搏、长间期抑制、房早后加速起搏功能开启时 ,模式转换发生的次数减少、第一次至第二次房颤发作的间期延长、平均 2 4h房早记数明显减少。结论 :初步临床应用提示 :三腔双心房起搏联合预防房颤的起搏治疗模式治疗快速性房性心律失常可行且有效。     

经右房间隔下部—右室心尖部行DDD起搏治疗顽固性起搏器综合征一例。

患者男性，58岁，18年前因病窦综合征行VVI起搏器置入，后因电极脱位而自成AAI起搏，于1年前更换起搏器时，心房电极因阻抗过高，再次置入心房电极不能起搏而改为VVI起搏，术后出现起搏器综合征。经电生理检查，证实右房上部无A波，冠状窦口可记录到A波，并可行心房起搏。右室起搏时为室房1：1逆传，此为起搏器综合征的机制。故保留原右室电极，于冠状窦口加心房螺旋电极固定，DDD起搏成功，起搏器综合征消失。     

Novel electrophysiologic parameter of dispersion of atrial repolarization: comparison of different atrial pacing methods

INTRODUCTION: Heterogeneity of ventricular repolarization plays a major role in reentrant tachyarrhythmias in cardiac tissue. However, the role of atrial repolarization added activation time (AT) to refractoriness in atrial vulnerability has not been investigated in detail. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study population consisted of 34 patients: 18 with atrial fibrillation (AF) and 16 without AF (control group). The effective refractory periods (ERPs) in the right atrial appendage, low lateral right atrium, high right septum, and distal coronary sinus, and ATs from P wave onset to each electrogram during sinus rhythm and right atrial appendage, low lateral right atrial, high right septal, distal coronary sinus, and biatrial pacing were measured. Atrial recovery time, defined as the sum of AT and ERP, and its dispersions during sinus rhythm, right atrial appendage, low lateral right atrial, high right septal, distal coronary sinus, and biatrial pacing were calculated. Both ERP dispersion and atrial recovery time dispersion during sinus rhythm were significantly greater in the AF group than in the control group. Atrial recovery time dispersion during distal coronary sinus, high right septal, or biatrial pacing was significantly smaller than that during right atrial appendage or low lateral right atrial pacing in each group. In particular, atrial recovery time dispersion during distal coronary sinus pacing was the smallest of the five pacing methods in the AF group. P wave duration during biatrial or high right septal pacing was significantly shorter than during right atrial appendage, low lateral right atrial, or distal coronary sinus pacing in each group. CONCLUSION: Atrial recovery time dispersion is suitable as an electrophysiologic parameter of atrial vulnerability. Distal coronary sinus pacing may prevent AF by increasing homogeneity of atrial repolarization, whereas biatrial and high right septal pacing contribute not only homogeneity of atrial repolarization but also improvement of atrial depolarization.     

Effect of Bachmann's bundle pacing on atrial fibrillation: electrophysiologic assessment

BACKGROUND: It has recently been reported that simultaneous multisite atrial pacing, Bachmann's bundle (BB) pacing, and coronary sinus (CS) pacing are useful for preventing the induction of atrial fibrillation (AF). HYPOTHESIS: We investigated whether a simple pacing approach via BB could reduce the induction of AF by extrastimuli (S2) from the right atrial appendage (RAA). METHODS: Programmed electrical stimulation was performed from the RAA and the area of BB at the superior aspect of the atrial septum, and bipolar recordings were obtained from the RAA, BB, and CS in 14 patients. RESULTS: In five patients, AF was induced with critically timed RAA-S2 delivered during RAA pacing. However, AF was not induced in any patient when RAA-S2 was delivered during BB pacing. The duration of the P wave during BB pacing was significantly shorter than that during RAA pacing and sinus rhythm (BB 80 +/- 16 ms vs. RAA 106 +/- 36 ms vs. sinus rhythm 100 +/- 24 ms, p < 0.05). The intra-atrial conduction time to the distal coronary sinus (CSd) caused by early S2 at the RAA was significantly reduced by BB pacing (BB 114 +/- 22 ms vs. RAA 157 +/- 35 ms, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Bachmann's bundle pacing reduces atrial conduction time caused by RAA-S2 and may be useful for preventing the induction of AF.     

三腔起搏器治疗快速性房性心律失常的临床应用(附二例报告)

目的观察三腔双心房起搏治疗快速性房性心律失常的临床效果。探讨三腔起搏的原理,适应症以及起搏模式的选择。方法患者2例均为男性,平均年龄50岁,诊断房间传导阻滞合并快速性房性心律失常,并植入三腔双心房同步起搏器。左心房起搏通过冠状静脉窦植入2188电极导线,左右心房电极导线通过Y形转接器与双腔起搏器连接。结果双房同步起搏后,患者快速房性心律失常的发作明显减少。结论初步临床应用提示,三腔双心房同步起搏治疗快速性房性心律失常可行且有效。     

不同部位及不同方式心房起搏对心房激动的影响

目的 了解不同部位、不同方式心房起搏时P波、P－R间期以及心房激动顺序的特点，从而寻找最佳的心房单部位起搏方式。方法 对20例射频消融成功后的患者，分别放置高位右房、右心耳、Koch三角、希氏束以及冠状窦电极，若为左侧旁路则加置左心房电极，行不同部位、不同方式心房起搏。结果 Koch三角、Koch三角＋高位右房、左房、双房起膊时P波宽度、P－R间期无差异，但右心耳起搏时各导联P波增宽，P－R间期延长。从心房激动顺序分析，右心耳起搏时，激动传至希氏束区及冠状窦区的时间最长，而Koch三角、Koch三角＋高位右房及双房起搏时则较短，尤其是Koch三角、Koch三角＋高位右房起搏缩短更明显。另外，不同部位、不同方式起搏时右心房压力无差异。结论 Koch三角起搏在某种程度上可替代高位右房＋冠状窦起搏及双房起搏。     

Biatrial pacing for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a randomized prospective study into the suppression of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation using biatrial pacing

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was twofold: to assess whether biatrial pacing is superior to single-site pacing and capable of reducing the frequency of episodes of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF); and to compare pacing of the proximal coronary sinus (PCS) with the distal coronary sinus (DCS) and the effects of sequential or simultaneous biatrial pacing. BACKGROUND: Interatrial conduction abnormalities have a role in the initiation of PAF. Biatrial pacing alters the site and timing of atrial depolarization and may benefit those with drug-resistant PAF. METHODS: Nineteen patients with PAF who were intolerant of or refractory to medication were studied. All received right atrial (RA) and coronary sinus (CS) leads (either PCS or DCS). For three months the pacemaker was set in sensing mode only. Subsequently each patient completed three-month periods in random order in the following modes: RA pacing, CS pacing, biatrial pacing using inter-atrial delays of 15 and 70 ms. RESULTS: Sixteen patients received a benefit from one or more pacing modes. The greatest reduction in PAF episodes was seen during biatrial pacing, especially with leads sited at the high right atrium (HRA) and distal CS (p = 0.0048). There was no difference for sequential or simultaneous pacing. Three patients derived no benefit. CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients, biatrial pacing causes a significant decrease in atrial fibrillation episodes. Optimal lead sites were at the HRA and DCS. Simultaneous pacing conferred no benefit over sequential pacing.     

三腔起搏器的临床应用

应用三腔起搏器治疗病窦以及同时有房室传导异常合并快速房性心律失常患者６例,其中５例为阵发房颤,１例为阵发房扑,心电图示房间阻滞。植入冠状窦电极及普通右房和右室电极,用Ｙ型转换器以右房耳电极为负极,冠状窦电极为正极构成新的双极电极。将４例患者ＤＤＤ起搏器调至ＡＡＴ模式,２例患者为ＤＤＤ模式,房性快速心律失常消失。随访２～６个月,疗效满意。三腔心脏起搏器适用于治疗病窦并有房室传导异常合并房内阻滞的阵发房扑和房颤的患者。     

A novel method of multisite atrial pacing, incorporating Bachmann's bundle area and coronary sinus ostium, for electrical atrial resynchronization in patients with recurrent atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: The aim of the study was to assess efficacy and safety of a novel method of multisite atrial pacing, incorporating Bachmann's bundle (BB) and coronary sinus (CS) ostium pacing, which was implemented for the first time in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with intra-atrial conduction delay. METHODS AND RESULTS: This follow-up study included 97 patients with drug refractory symptomatic AF, sinus node dysfunction, sinus P-wave > or = 120 ms, and normal atrioventricular conduction. Pacing efficacy was assessed on the basis of two main endpoints: successful rhythm control and the absence of documented or symptomatic AF. During the mean 2.3 +/- 0.7 years of follow-up, the survival rate was 99%, pacing maintenance rate 97%, and the need for re-operation 5%. Rhythm control efficacy was 90%, and 14 patients had no evidence of recurrent AF. After implantation, the mean number of anti-arrhythmic drugs used (P < 0.0001), the need for cardioversion (P < 0.01), and the incidence (P < 0.0001) and duration (P < 0.001) of AF-related hospitalizations decreased. P-wave duration with multisite atrial pacing was shorter than during sinus rhythm, BB, and CS pacing (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: A novel method of multisite atrial pacing is safe, provides effective long-term rhythm control, and decreases the necessity for adjunctive therapies in patients with refractory AF and intra-atrial conduction delay.     

Deterioration of interatrial conduction in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: Electroanatomic mapping of the right atrium and coronary sinus

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to analyze the velocities across the coronary sinus ostium (cross-CSo) and within the coronary sinus (intra-CS) in patients with and without paroxysmal atrial (AF) fibrillation and to estimate the interatrial conduction deterioration area in AF patients. BACKGROUND: Interatrial conduction delay in AF patients has been reported. However, localization of the interatrial conduction delay still is not clear. METHODS: Thirteen patients with paroxysmal AF and 10 control patients with AV nodal reentrant tachycardia or ectopic atrial tachycardia were enrolled in the study. Right atrial and CS mapping were performed using the CARTO electroanatomic mapping system during sinus rhythm and during distal CS pacing. The activation times and spatial distances of cross-CSo and intra-CS were measured between paired sites, from which the activation velocities of cross-CSo and intra-CS were obtained. RESULTS: During sinus rhythm, the activation velocities of cross-CSo in the AF group (1.2 +/- 0.2 m/s) were significantly slower than those in the control group (2.9 +/- 1.6 m/s, P < .05). During distal CS pacing, the cross-CSo velocities of the AF group (1.0 +/- 0.5 m/s) also appeared slower than those in the control group (1.4 +/- 0.2 m/s, P = .07). However, no difference was found in intra-CS activation velocities between the two groups (2.8 +/- 1.9 vs 3.2 +/- 2.2 m/s and 1.5 +/- 0.3 vs 1.4 +/- 0.3 m/s, P > .05 during sinus rhythm and distal CS pacing, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Interatrial conduction at the posteroparaseptal region across the CS ostium was significantly slower in patients with paroxysmal AF than in control patients, further supporting the link between interatrial conduction deterioration and paroxysmal AF.