双腔起搏器最小化心室起搏功能的临床初步观察

目的:评价开启最小化心室起搏功能的双腔起搏器减少心室起搏的有效性、安全性及对患者生活质量的影响。方法:入选40例接受双腔起搏治疗的患者,将开启最小化心室起搏功能的20例DDD患者纳入最小化心室起搏组,其余20例无或未开启最小化心室起搏功能的DDD患者纳入传统双腔起搏组。通过程控随访观察患者心房和心室的起搏比例;通过SF-36健康调查简表观察2组患者的生活质量。结果:没有观察到与最小化心室起搏功能有关的不良反应;最小化心室起搏组患者心房起搏比例与传统双腔起搏组相比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),最小化心室起搏组患者心室起搏比例较传统双腔起搏组显著降低(34.1±24.2%∶62.2±25.4%,P<0.01);较传统双腔起搏组SF-36得分有增加的趋势,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:最小化心室起搏功能可以安全、有效的降低患者心室起搏的比例,但不能显著改善患者的生活质量。     

多部位起搏的急性血流动力学对比研究

目的 :比较右心室双部位起搏、双心室同步起搏、右心室心尖部起搏、右心室流出道起搏、左心室基底部起搏等 5种不同起搏模式对血流动力学的影响。方法 :15例患者男 10例 ,女 5例 ,年龄 6 6± 6 4岁。其中病态窦房结综合征 8例 ;Ⅲ度房室传导阻滞 7例。分别行右心室心尖部、右心室流出道、右心室双部位起搏、左心室基底部及双心室同步起搏 (VVI ,6 0～ 90次 /分 ) ,测定心输出量(CO)、心脏指数 (CI)、肺毛细血管嵌顿压 (PCWP)、QRS波群宽度和电轴。结果 :①与右心室心尖部起搏相比 ,右心室流出道、右心室双部位、左心室基底部、双心室同步起搏的CO、CI显著增加 ,PCWP明显降低 (P均 <0 0 1) ;②右心室双部位、双心室同步起搏较右心室流出道、左心室基底部起搏的CO、CI增高而PCWP降低 (P均 <0 0 5 ) ;③右心室双部位与双心室同步起搏、右心室流出道与左心室基底部起搏之间CO、CI和PCWP无显著差异 ;④右心室双部位、双心室同步起搏的QRS波群宽度较右心室心尖部、右心室流出道、左心室基底部起搏显著缩短 (P均 <0 0 1) ,而左心室基底部起搏与右心室心尖部起搏间无显著差异。结论 :右心室双部位起搏和双心室同步起搏的急性血流动力学效果无明显差异 ,但双部位起搏的效果明显优于单部位起搏 ;双部位起搏的Q     

心力衰竭伴起搏适应证患者双心室再同步治疗的探讨

<正>双心室同步起搏的概念在1983年由De Teresa在第七届全球心脏起搏研讨会上首次提出,上个世纪90年代中旬开始临床试验,目前已经历了20年历程。大量循证医学证据证明[1-4],对于窦性心律、左束支传导阻滞(LBBB)的收缩性心力衰竭具有良好的临床疗效。本文将探讨心力衰竭(心衰)伴起搏适应证患者双心室再同步治疗的效果及适     

左室和双心室起搏对心肌病晚期心衰患者的血流动力学研究

目的　对心电图呈左束支阻滞的晚期心肌病患者行左室和双心室起搏 ,了解左室和双心室起搏的急性期血流动力学效应。方法　对 16例心电图呈左束支阻滞的晚期心肌病患者行左室游离壁和双心室起搏 ,记录左室、双心室和基础状态下的左室腔内dP/dtmax、主动脉根部压力和心电图QRS波宽度。结果　左室和双心室起搏分别使左室dP/dtmax提高 2 1%和 18% (P <0 0 1) ,而左室和双心室起搏组无显著差异 (P >0 0 5 ) ;左室起搏和双心室起搏使主动脉收缩压较基础状态升高 6 %和 5 % (P <0 0 1) ,左室和双心室起搏组间差异不显著 (P >0 0 5 ) ;左室起搏心电图QRS间期缩短不明显 (P >0 0 5 ) ,而双心室起搏QRS间期明显缩短(P <0 0 5 )。结论　对于心电图呈LBBB型的心肌病终末期心衰患者 ,行双心室起搏和左室游离壁起搏均使患者的急性期血流动力学得到显著改善 ,两者的效果相当     

左束支起搏治疗心力衰竭的研究进展

左束支起搏可维持左心室电与机械同步性,对起搏诱导性心肌病、心房颤动快心室率合并心力衰竭和需要再同步化治疗及常规双心室起搏失败后的心力衰竭患者有显著疗效,现综述该领域的研究进展.     

心室多部位起搏治疗充血性心力衰竭的进展

<正> 多部位起搏是指心房或心室多个部位起搏或感知.经左心和右心室(或心房)起搏称为双心室(或双心房)起搏,而在同一心腔内两个部位起搏称为双部位起搏.随着心脏起搏技术的进展,起搏器的临床适应症已不仅限于治疗缓慢心律失常,而具有更多的生理性功能及新的治疗作用.心室多部位起搏在治疗充血性心力衰竭方面的作用越来越引起人们的重视,本文就此综述如下.     

对心肌病晚期心力衰竭患者行左心室和双心室起搏的血流动力学研究

目的　了解左心室和双心室起搏的急性期血流动力学效应。方法　对 16例心电图呈左束支传导阻滞 (LBBB)的晚期心肌病患者行左室游离壁和双心室起搏 ,记录左室、双心室和基础状态下的左室腔内最大压力上升速率 (dP dtmax)、主动脉根部压力和心电图QRS波宽度。结果　左室和双心室起搏分别使左室dP dtmax提高 2 1%和 18% (P <0 0 1) ,左室和双心室起搏组间无显著差异 ;左室起搏和双心室起搏使主动脉收缩压较基础状态升高 6 %和 5 % (P <0 0 1) ,左室和双心室起搏组间差异不显著 ;左室起搏心电图QRS间期缩短不明显 ,而双心室起搏QRS间期明显缩短。结论　对于心电图呈LBBB型的心肌病终末期心力衰竭患者 ,行双心室起搏和左室游离壁起搏均使患者的急性期血流动力学得到显著改善 ,两者的效果相当     

循证医学指导合理选择起搏模式

大型研究表明双腔起搏在改善生活质量、降低心衰住院率及房颤发生率方面优于心室起搏,但在改善生存率及减少脑卒中方面前者无优势;还有小型研究显示心房起搏优于心室起搏及双腔起搏.对于窦房结功能障碍而房室结功能正常且无束支传导阻滞的患者推荐植入单腔心房起搏器.     

起搏器计时规则与起搏心电图分析—DDD起搏心电图与计时方式（续2）

DDD起搏是指心房、心室顺序起搏,且心房、心室均具有感知功能,心房感知后抑制心房起搏脉冲而触发心室起搏脉冲,心室感知后则可抑制心室及心房起搏脉冲的双腔起搏模式.以DDD模式进行起搏时,心电图中可根据患者自身的心率和房室结传导情况的不同而表现为4种不同的组合:①心房起搏,心室起搏;②心房起搏,心室感知;③心房感知,心室起搏;④心房和心室均为自身激动.     

T波过感知致双心室起搏丧失一例

患者,男性,40岁。心脏再同步化治疗(CRT)中,心电监护窦性心律下出现间歇性心室2∶1起搏,起搏器腔内图可见较多心室感知事件,T波过感知导致双心室起搏丧失,通过降低心室感知灵敏度、缩短心室后心房不应期等方法可保证高比例的有效的双心室同步起搏,确保CRT疗效。     

双心室起搏的初步临床经验

目的 探讨缺血性或扩张型心肌病合并充血性心力衰竭行永久性双心室起搏治疗的临床效果。方法 对５例缺血性或扩张型心肌病合并难治性心力衰竭和左束支阻滞患者常规植入右心室起搏导线的同时植入冠状静脉窦导线于心大静脉或心中静脉，分别行右心室心尖部起搏及双心室起搏，应用Ｓｗａｎ－Ｇａｎｚ导管或超声心动图测定不同起搏地心功能的影响。结果 在充血性心力衰竭合并左束支阻滞患者植入冠状静脉窦导经至心大静脉或心中静脉行以     

双心室起搏治疗充血性心力衰竭

探讨双心室起搏技术治疗慢性充血性心力衰竭的临床疗效。 11例充血性心力衰竭患者 ,男 9例、女 2例 ,年龄 5 4± 7岁。心功能 (NYHA)Ⅲ～Ⅳ级 ,均伴有心室内传导阻滞。全部患者置入三腔双心室起搏器 ,左心室电极置于冠状静脉侧支及后侧分支内。结果 :手术全部成功。所有患者于置入后症状改善 ,体表心电图QRS时限由 15 9.8± 4 .4 2ms缩至 130 .5± 3.6 9ms ,P <0 .0 1。随访 6～ 18个月 ,超声心动图显示左室射血分数由 0 .2 5± 0 .0 5增至 0 .38± 0 .0 5 ,P <0 .0 1、舒张期充盈改善、二尖瓣返流减少。结论 :双心室起搏可以改善药物控制困难的伴室内传导阻滞的心衰患者的临床症状 ,改善心功能 ,提高生活质量。     

起搏治疗慢性充血性心力衰竭的进展

心脏起搏治疗慢性充血性心力衰竭是非药理学治疗的新方法。已经证实双心室同步起搏可以改善慢性充血性心力衰竭患者的血流动力学、心功能状态和生活质量 ,心脏同步起搏联合心脏内复律除颤器治疗减少了病死率和再住院率 ,相关临床试验仍在进行中。     

Biventricular pacing as a treatment for advanced heart failure. Preliminary experience in a series of 22 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Recent data suggest that biventricular pacing may play an important role in treating advanced heart failure in the presence of a significant interventricular and/or intraventricular conduction disorder by correcting cardiac dysynchrony. In this article, we review the initial technical and clinical experience with cardiac resynchronization therapy in an electrophysiology laboratory. METHODS: The first 22 consecutive patients with severe congestive heart failure, ejection fraction < 0.35, NYHA functional class III or IV, and QRS duration > 120 ms who were implanted biventricular pacemakers were studied. Clinical, electrocardiographic, and echocardiographic evaluations were made before and three months after pacemaker implantation. Acute functional capacity testing with peak oxygen uptake was measured during biventricular pacing and during intrinsic rhythm or right ventricular pacing three months after the implantation procedure. RESULTS: The success rate of pacemaker implantation was 95%. Pre-discharge left ventricular pacing was achieved in 91%, with an average pacing threshold of 1.53 (1.04) volts. NYHA functional class improved (p = 0.039) from 3.4 (0.7) to 2.3 (0.78). The rate of hospitalization for heart failure decreased from an average of 3.12 (0.58) three months before the procedure to 1.38 (0.34) three months after the procedure. Peak oxygen uptake was significantly greater (p = 0.028) during biventricular pacing: 14.89 (2.1) ml/min/kg, than during intrinsic rhythm or right ventricular pacing: 12.65 (2.3) ml/min/kg. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac resynchronization therapy can be performed safely and with a high success rate in the electrophysiology laboratory. Biventricular pacing seems to improve the symptoms of congestive heart failure in patients with evidence of atrioventricular and/or interventricular/intraventricular dysynchrony. An acute benefit in peak oxygen uptake was associated with biventricular pacing after the implantation procedure.     

Cardiac stimulation and heart insufficiency

Dilated cardiomyopathies are frequently associated with atrioventricular and intra ventricular conduction disorders. Such conduction disorders modify the cardiac activation sequence and impair left ventricular systolic and diastolic function. The aim of pacing in dilated cardiomyopathy is to restore a cardiac activation sequence as normal as possible. Conventional dual-chamber pacing was first proposed to treat drug-refractory heart failure but was soon replaced by multisite biventricular pacing. The aim of biventricular pacing is to correct intraventricular asynchrony by pacing the two ventricles simultaneously. Acute studies have shown that biventricular pacing could improve hemodynamic parameters in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy and severe intraventricular conduction disorders. More recently, chronic studies demonstrated a significant improvement in exercise tolerance and quality of life with biventricular pacing in patients with drug-refractory heart failure and with intraventricular conduction disorders. To safely pace the left ventricle specific materials and tools had to be developed. With those developments, biventricular pacing is now a feasible and safe technique. Regarding the results of several clinical studies, biventricular pacing could now be proposed to treat patients with drug-refractory heart failure in the setting of chronic left ventricular systolic dysfunction and with major intraventricular conduction disorders.     

双心室起搏治疗心力衰竭的初步经验

目的 介绍双心室起搏治疗心力衰竭衰竭的初步经验。方法 ６例充血性心力衰竭患者,男性４例,女性２例,平均年龄５８岁;心功能ＮＹＨＡ分级：Ⅲ～Ⅳ级：均伴有心室内阻滞。患者均植入了三腔双心室起搏器,左心室导线通过冠状静脉窦插入心脏静脉侧分支或侧后分支。结果 所有患者植入起搏器后临床症状改善,超声心动图检查显示左心室收缩功能和同步性改善,舒张期充盈改善,二尖瓣返流减少,此外,双心定起搏后,所有病例ＱＲＳ时     

Long-term improvements in quality of life by biventricular pacing in patients with chronic heart failure: results from the Multisite Stimulation in Cardiomyopathy study (MUSTIC)

To assess the impact of biventricular pacing on quality of life over 12 months of follow-up, 76 patients in the MUSTIC trial were evaluated by 2 instruments: The Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire and the Karolinska Quality of Life Questionnaire. MUSTIC is a randomized, controlled study to evaluate the effects of biventricular pacing in patients in New York Heart Association class III heart failure with intraventricular conduction delay. Following a single, blind, crossover comparison of 3 months of biventricular pacing to inactive pacing (sinus rhythm group) or ventricular-inhibited pacing (atrial fibrillation group), 85% of patients preferred and were programmed to biventricular pacing and were followed for 12 months. In parallel with clinical improvements, substantial benefits in quality of life for most broad domains of quality of life and cardiovascular symptoms were found during biventricular pacing already within the crossover phase with a maintained benefit over the 12-month follow-up. Biventricular pacing improved quality of life in patients with heart failure and intraventricular conduction delays. The benefits were sustained over 12 months of follow-up.     

右心室心脏起搏升级双心室起搏的临床应用进展

心脏再同步化治疗是一项成熟应用于临床进展期心力衰竭合并左心收缩功能不全,心脏失同步患者治疗方法。右心室心尖部起搏改变了正常心脏的激动收缩顺序从而导致心脏电机械失同步,心脏收缩功能下降最终发生心力衰竭。适时地将起搏患者右心室起搏系统升级为双心室起搏可以纠正右室起搏导致的心脏失同步,最大限度保持左、右双心室间正常的电激动顺序和收缩同步性,有效地避免了起搏对血流动力学和心功能的不良影响。近来短期研究发现这种起搏系统升级可明显改善心脏活动的同步性,从而改善心功能、提高生活质量。文章综述了右室心尖部起搏的病理生理及升级右室起搏到双室起搏治疗的相关临床试验、显效机制及存在的问题。     

Cardiac resynchronization pacing therapy

Approximately one third of patients with congestive heart failure and systolic dysfunction have an intraventricular conduction delay that is manifested as a QRS duration >120 ms. An intraventricular conduction delay adversely affects ventricular performance by causing dyssynchrony in ventricular activation. When ventricular dyssynchrony is present, simultaneous left and right ventricular pacing or cardiac resynchronization therapy can improve ventricular synchrony. This can lead to an improvement in hemodynamics, ventricular remodeling, mitral regurgitation, exercise capacity and quality of life. Candidates for cardiac resynchronization therapy include patients with advanced congestive heart failure that is refractory to medical therapy, a QRS duration >130 ms, left ventricular ejection fraction <0.35 and sinus rhythm. Because patients who are candidates for biventricular pacing are at high risk of sudden death, they should be considered for implantation of a biventricular pacing device that also provides defibrillation therapy. This paper reviews biventricular pacing for congestive heart failure, including results of acute hemodynamic studies and randomized clinical trials, patient and device selection, and procedural issues.     

双心室起搏对慢性心力衰竭患者心肺功能和生活质量的影响

目的:观察双心室起搏对慢性心力衰竭患者心肺功能和生活质量的影响。方法:慢性心力衰竭伴室内传导阻滞患者9例,植入三腔双心室起搏器,比较双心室起搏前、后患者超声心动图检查、心肺功能和生活质量的变化。结果:双心室同步起搏后.患者左室射血分数(%)由术前(21.6±6.7)%增加到(27.3±5.2)%(术后3月,P< 0.05)。(29.5±5.4)%(术后6月,P<0.05);6 min步行距离,由术前(320±97)m增加到(384±103)m(术后3月.P<0.01).(413±110)m(术后6月.P<0.01);峰值氧耗量、氧通气当量(VE/VO2)、二氧化碳通气当量(VE/VCO2)较术前均有显著增加(P<0.05～<0.01);生活质量评分分别改善30%(术后3月,P<0.01),28% (术后6月,P<0.01)。结论:双心室起搏能有效改善慢性心衰患者心肺功能,增加运动贮量,提高生活质量。