双房单室三腔起搏器治疗病窦综合征并快速房性心律失常

观察双心房、单心室三腔起搏器治疗病窦综合征合并阵发性房性快速心律失常患者的疗效。三根电极导线分别置入冠状静脉窦内、右心耳和右室心尖部行三腔起搏。冠状窦电极导线与右心房电极导线通过一个Y型转接器构成心房部分。结果 :10例患者 ,9例经左锁骨下静脉径路置入导线 ,1例因存在残存左上腔静脉 ,从右锁骨下静脉置入。 10例中 9例冠状窦电极导线置于冠状静脉窦中部、1例置于冠状静脉窦远端。冠状窦起搏阈值为 1.0 6±0 .2 0V、起搏阻抗 6 11± 115 .8Ω、P波振幅为 4.0 7± 0 .88mV ;右室电极起搏阈值为 0 .5 3± 0 .12V、起搏阻抗 6 70 .3±191.7Ω、R波振幅为 9.6 6± 1.87mV。随访 5～ 2 4个月有 9例起搏器呈DDD工作方式 ,1例呈AAT工作方式。起搏和感知功能良好。 10例中 8例快速性房性心律失常完全控制 ,2例发作次数减少 ,持续时间明显缩短。无一例出现并发症。结论 :三腔起搏器技术安全、可靠。适合于缓慢型心律失常合并阵发性房性快速性心律失常     

普通心室电极导线经心脏静脉行左室起搏的实验研究

探讨普通电极导线经心脏静脉行左室起搏的可行性和牢固性。选用 10个新鲜猪心 ,用 3种形态的普通电极导线 (4翼、2翼和无翼 )分别插入右室心尖部、心大静脉、左室后静脉和心中静脉 ,测电极导线在心脏静脉的深度、阻抗和拔出力量。右室心尖部作为对照组 ,仅测阻抗和拔出力量。结果 :三种普通电极导线都能成功地送入心脏静脉。三种电极导线在同一心脏静脉进入深度之间无差异 (P >0 .0 5 ) ,在不同心脏静脉进入深度之间有显著差异(P <0 .0 5 )。电极导线在所有心脏静脉的拔出力量都大于右室心尖部 (P <0 .0 5 )。三种电极导线在同一心脏静脉拔出力量之间无差异 (P >0 .0 5 ) ;4翼、2翼电极导线在不同心脏静脉拔出力量之间也无差异 (P >0 .0 5 ) ,而无翼电极导线有差异 (P =0 .0 4)。电极导线进入心脏静脉深度与拔出力量之间存在正相关 (r=0 .48,P <0 .0 0 1)。电极导线在心脏静脉的阻抗为 6 35± 32 3Ω。结论 :三种普通心室电极导线都可以送入心脏静脉远端 ,都较牢固     

心脏三腔起搏除颤器的临床应用

目的　评价具有心脏再同步化治疗 (CRT)和置入式心脏复律除颤器 (ICD)功能起搏器(CRT D)置入的安全性和有效性。方法　共 11例患者纳入研究。年龄 4 8～ 84 (71 6± 9 5 )岁 ,男 7例 ,女 4例。患者有心脏猝死或室性心动过速或电生理检查出现室性心动过速或心室颤动 ;左室射血分数≤ 35 % ,QRS≥ 12 0ms。所有患者置入的CRT D是美敦力INSYNCⅡMARQUIS 72 89,左心室电极置于冠状静脉窦左心室侧后壁分支或左后壁分支。右心房电极和右心室电极都使用主动螺旋电极 ,后者置于室间隔上部。手术在全麻下进行。术后次日在心脏超声指导下进行AV优化。结果　所有患者顺利度过手术 ,无并发症。放射时间为 19～ 73(44 7± 19 9)min。心房电极的振幅、阻抗和阈值分别为 (2 4 7± 0 77)mV、(5 90± 12 6 )Ω、(1 37± 0 71)V。右心室电极的振幅、阻抗和阈值分别为 (11 0 0± 3 4 8)mV、(5 86± 116 )Ω、(0 6 9± 0 2 1)V。左心室电极的振幅、阻抗和阈值分别为(15 37± 5 .15 )mV、(6 0 2± 12 5 )Ω、(1 6 2± 1 5 9)V。除颤阈 2 0J和 6J的各 3例 ,15J、12J和 3J各 1例。 1例患者因为原有除颤电极失效而更换为皮下电极 ,但仍除颤失败。另 1例患者因为出现心电图ST T变化而暂时未测定除颤阈值。所有患者除颤能量     

左室电极导线的随访观察

行心脏再同步治疗(CRT)101例,随访29.5±19.5个月。左室电极导线脱位4例(占4.0%),其中2例轻度脱位,提高起搏阈值可起搏左室;1例脱至冠状窦,另1例为3根电极导线均脱到右房,此2例均重新置入。左室电极导线起搏阈值术后随时间延长呈逐渐增高的趋势,阻抗的变化趋势是逐渐降低。     

不同起搏方式对心脏结构的影响

目的　评价不同起搏方式 (DDD方式和 VVI方式 )对长期心脏起搏患者左心结构的影响。方法　选择安装永久起搏器患者 6 3例 ,其中 VVI起搏 38例 ,DDD起搏 2 5例 ,运用超声心动图仪观测起搏器置入前及置入后随访期左心结构及功能的变化。结果　 VVI起搏平均 (31.6± 5 .8)月时左心房内径扩大 ,从 (32 .6 8± 4 .71) mm至 (38.31±5 .2 1) m m ;左心室舒张末期内径扩大 ,从 (4 8.2 4± 4 .93) mm至 (5 1.33± 5 .6 4 ) mm ;室间隔厚度增加 ,从 (8.91±1.12 ) mm至 (10 .32± 1.4 3) mm ;左心室重量指数增加 ,从 (96 .75± 13.32 ) g/m2 至 (12 9.1± 2 1.79) g/m2 ;左心室射血分数下降 ,从 0 .5 1± 0 .0 79至 0 .4 7± 0 .0 71,与术前比较有显著差异 (P<0 .0 5 )。 DDD起搏平均 (30 .2± 6 .3)月时 ,左心结构及左心室射血分数变化不明显 (P>0 .0 5 )。结论　 DDD起搏对左心结构影响较小 ,VVI起搏可引起左心重构     

经静脉埋藏式三腔起搏心脏转复除颤器的临床应用

探讨经静脉埋藏式三腔起搏心脏转复除颤器 (BVP ICD)的临床应用。病例入选标准 :①缺血性心脏病、扩张性心肌病合并充血性心力衰竭。②左室射血分数 <0 .35。③QRS波时限 >130ms。④ 2 4h动态心电图、临床心电监护、腔内电生理检查中 ,任一项记录到明确室性心动过速 (VT)或心室颤动 (VF)。采用经锁骨下静脉和头静脉 ,分别置入右室电极导管到右室 ,右房电极导管到右心耳 ,左室电极经冠状静脉窦到冠状静脉后侧支 ,其中 1例为经静脉埋藏三腔双室起搏器 (BVP)升级为BVP ICD。结果 :双室起搏阈值 1.7± 0 .7V ,R波幅度 10 .3± 4mV ,双室电极阻抗 896 .2± 82Ω。4例先后 2次采用电击T波诱发出VT或VF ,并除颤成功。 3例因心功能差仅诱发 1次并除颤成功。最低有效除颤能量 2例 11J ,5例 2 0～ 2 1J ,手术时间 12 9.2 8± 4 7.3min。 7例随访 3～ 12个月 ,心功能改善 1～ 2级。 2例分别各有 1例除颤事件记录 ,7例全部存活。结论 :BVP ICD临床疗效较好 ,但设定首次电击能量时不宜太小 ,力争尽快转复心律 ,以策安全。慎用快速心室起搏 (Ramp)终止VT。     

右室双部位起搏治疗心力衰竭的临床观察

评价 15例患者经右室双部位起搏治疗慢性心力衰竭 (简称心衰 )的疗效。其中原发性扩张型心肌病心衰 13例、缺血性心肌病心衰 2例 ;心功能Ⅲ级 9例、Ⅳ级 6例。结果 :15例患者安置时右室心尖部起搏阈值 0 .5± 0 .3(0 .3～ 1.0 )V、R波振幅 15± 5 .98(6～ 2 4.6 )mV ,阻抗 6 13± 172 (32 0～ 90 0 )Ω。右室流出道起搏阈值 0 .7± 0 .2 6 (0 .3～1.3)V、R波振幅 13± 5 .5 5 (6 .5～ 2 3.6 )mV、阻抗 5 6 3± 194(30 0～ 90 0 )Ω ;双部位起搏阈值 1.45± 0 .45 (0 .9～ 1.7)V。双部位起搏心电图QRS波群时限比右室心尖部及右室流出道单部位起搏缩短了 40～ 90ms。超声心动图检查提示双部位起搏后二尖瓣返流面积平均减少 5 .6cm2 ,射血分数值提高 5 .2 %。经 6 .0± 1.5个月的随访 ,15例中除 2例因突发恶性室性心律失常猝死外 ,其余患者的心功能分别从Ⅲ、Ⅳ级改善到Ⅱ和Ⅲ级。右室双部位慢性起搏阈值1.85± 0 .5 6 (1.5～ 2 .5 )V。随访期间QRS波群时限平均下降 5 0ms。结论 :右室双部位起搏能有效的治疗心肌病患者的心衰。     

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。     

Champion 7302起搏系统临床应用体会

评价Ｃｈａｍｐｉｏｎ 730 2心脏起搏系统的临床疗效及应用价值。 9例患者 ,男 6例 ,女 3例 ,年龄 6 7.0± 10 .9(4 3～ 81)岁 ,其中病窦综合征 5例 ,Ⅲ度房室阻滞 4例 ,术前均伴有晕厥、乏力、气短等心动过缓症状。植入时的起搏阈值 0 .5 6± 0 .15Ｖ(脉宽 0 .5ｍｓ)、阻抗5 0 0 .0± 10 0 .8Ω(5Ｖ起搏时 )、Ｒ波振幅 12 .2± 3.6ｍＶ。本组病例术后晕厥、气短、乏力等心动过缓症状消失 ,无头晕、胸痛等特殊不适 ,无囊袋血肿及破溃发生 ,亦无胸大肌跳动、膈肌刺激症状出现。 1例于置入第 4天出现竞争心律 ,Ｘ线证实电极由右室流入道脱位至…     

双室同步起搏的临床应用及置入左室电极的初步体会

观察双室同步起搏治疗充血性心力衰竭 (CHF)的疗效 ,探讨左室电极置入的方法及注意事项。 10例患者均为原发性扩张型心肌病 (DCM)并CHF ,符合双室同步起搏治疗的指征。其中 8例置入Medtronic 2 187电极 ,1例置入Medtronic 2 188电极 ,1例置入右室主动固定电极。 9例左室电极置入成功 ,1例失败改行右室双部位起搏 ,术后患者左室舒张未径、左室射血分数及 6min步行距离均有改善 (术后 3个月与术前分别比较 :70 .8± 9.5vs 79.5± 12 .5mm ,0 .4 2± 0 .13vs 0 .2 5± 0 .10 ,384 .8± 4 5 .4vs 2 78.6± 34.5m ;P <0 .0 5或 0 .0 1)。借助电生理冠状静脉窦 (CS)标测电极、CS造影 (包括直接逆行CS造影和冠状动脉造影使CS间接显像 )对指导左室电极的置入有较大的价值。结论 :双室同步起搏治疗CHF疗效肯定 ,借助CS标测电极及CS造影可提高左室电极置入的成功率     

2187导线在左心室起搏中的应用价值

目的寻找左心室电极导线的导入途经和技术要点及其在双心室起搏中的临床实用价值.方法 9例病人,男性8例,均为药物治疗无效合并CLBBB的顽固性心力衰竭.CS造影7例采用逆行法,2例采用顺行法显示CS.选择可剥脱CS导引导管和左室电极导线(Medtronic,2187),采用左锁骨下静脉穿刺法,经CS将电极导线置于CS左心室属支,起搏左心室.结果无论是逆行还是顺行冠状动脉造影,均清晰显示CS及其属支静脉.6例病人经导引导管将2187导线成功导入靶静脉,3例病人直接导入2187导线.电极导线尖端1例插进心大静脉远端,2例位于左室侧缘静脉,2例放在左室后静脉, 4例导入左室后侧静脉.导线到位后测量的各起搏参数均符合起搏要求,长期随访未见导线脱位和起搏功能的变化.结论 CS顺行和逆行造影均可清晰显示CS及其属支;直接或经导引导管皆可将2187电极导线导入靶静脉;应用2187型LV电极导线经CS左心室心外膜起搏技术可行、安全可靠,可广泛临床应用.     

双心室起搏埋藏式心脏转复除颤器的安置

评价一次性置入双心室起搏埋藏式心律转复除颤器 (双腔ICD)的安全性和有效性。5例冠心病冠状动脉搭桥术后的患者 ,伴有严重的慢性充血性心力衰竭和恶性室性心律失常 ,置入双腔ICD。结果 :5例左室电极导管和双腔ICD均一次成功置入 ,左室电极放入冠状静脉的侧后枝 ,急性起搏阈值 0 .8± 0 .6V ,电阻 72 2± 12 8Ω ,R波振幅18.6± 5 .3mV ,电流 1.6± 0 .5mA ,而双心室起搏时其起搏电极参数均优于左室电极 ,除颤阈值≤ 14J。结论 :对伴严重慢性充血性心力衰竭和恶性室性心律失常的患者 ,置入双腔ICD是安全、易行的。     

Performance of 3D,navigator echo-gated,contrast-enhanced,magnetic resonance coronary vein imaging in patients undergoing CRT

Purpose

The aims of this study were to evaluate the ability of contrast-enhanced MRI to visualize the coronary veins with validation by the gold standard, X-ray venography, and to determine whether MRI can visualize the coronary vein branch used for left ventricular (LV) lead implantation.

Materials and methods

Nineteen (19) patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) received a cardiac MRI at 1.5T 1 week before treatment. Coronary vein images were acquired using a 3D, navigator- and ECG-gated, contrast-enhanced, inversion-recovery, fast low-angle shot (FLASH) sequence. X-ray venography was performed during the CRT procedure to image the coronary venous anatomy and the LV lead location. MRI coronary vein images were graded on a 0–3 scale (0?=?nonexistent, 1?=?poor, 2?=?good, 3?=?excellent). MRI and X-ray venogram images were also graded using a binary visible/not visible scheme to compare the visibility of the coronary veins.

Results

The mean visibility scores for the coronary sinus, the posterior interventricular, the posterior vein of the left ventricle, the left marginal vein, and the anterior interventricular were 3.0?±?0.2, 2.3?±?0.7, 1.6?±?1.1, 1.9?±?0.8 and 2.4?±?0.9, respectively. When compared to X-ray venography, MRI was capable of visualizing 90 % of veins and all of the veins used for LV lead implantation. The vein used for LV lead implantation had an average vein image quality score of 1.9 on MRI images.

Conclusions

Contrast-enhanced MRI was capable of visualizing 90% of the coronary venous anatomy and was able visualize the vein used for LV lead implantation in all patients.     

冠状窦电极的临床应用研究

目的　评价 sp2 188电极及普通心室电极经冠状窦行左心房起搏的可行性和安全性。方法　 16例患者 ,其中 9例选用 sp2 188电极 ,7例选用普通心室电极。所有患者均行左锁骨下静脉穿刺 ,X线采用正位或左前斜位植入冠状窦电极 ,寻找最佳的起搏和感知部位 ,同时高能量也不致心室夺获。结果　 15例患者成功植入于冠状窦中、远端 ,术中起搏参数如下 (单极 ,脉宽 0 .5 4 m s) ,sp2 188电极组 :电压 ( 1.4 5± 1.4 5 ) V,感知 ( 4 .2 6± 0 .77) m V,阻抗 ( 5 0 5 .6±10 8.1) Ω;普通心室电极组 :电压 ( 1.4 3± 0 .91) V,感知 ( 3.93± 1.4 4 ) m V,阻抗 ( 4 6 8.3± 14 5 .1) Ω。两组起搏电压、感知、阻抗差异无显著性 ( P值均 >0 .0 5 )。随访 2～ 32 (平均 15 .0 )月 ,无一例死亡。其中 2例 sp2 188电极者发生脱位及微脱位 ,各有 1例 sp2 188电极者及普通心室电极发生起搏器介导性心动过速。最后一次随访结束 ,两组患者冠状窦电极起搏和感知功能均良好。结论　普通心室电极经冠状窦中、远端行左心房起搏可行、安全 ,且价格便宜 ,适合临床应用。     

Maneuvering balloon occlusion technique to deflect LV lead into a target branch during CRT implantation

Implantation of specifically designed left ventricular (LV) lead is a relatively complex procedure that depends on the anatomy of the coronary veins, available instrumentation, and experience of the operator. In patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) tortuosity of the selected branch of coronary sinus (CS) leads to difficult or failed LV placement. A case study of a 45-year-old woman with DCM requiring lead placement is presented here. To plan for proper LV lead positioning, CS angiography was obtained through right femoral vein approach with preshaped long sheath (SJM, SL3) and occlusive balloon. For successful implant of LV lead, with no viable alternatives available, the tortuosity of the lateral and posterolateral branch were overcome by advancing and inflating the balloon in the main CS to deflect LV lead into the target branch. A unipolar LV lead (Medtronic 4193) was finally placed in a true posterolateral position with excellent sensing and pacing threshold without phrenic nerve stimulation.     

Preferred left ventricular lead position for upgrade from right ventricular pacing to cardiac resynchronization therapy

Introduction

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is well-established for treating symptomatic heart failure with electrical dyssynchrony. The left ventricular (LV) lead position is recommended at LV posterolateral to lateral sites in patients with left bundle branch block; however, its preferred region remains unclear in patients being upgraded from right ventricular (RV) apical pacing to CRT. This study aimed to identify the preferred LV lead position for upgrading conventional RV apical pacing to CRT.

Methods

We used electrode catheters positioned at the RV apex and LV anterolateral and posterolateral sites via the coronary sinus (CS) branches to measure the ratio of activation time to QRS duration from the RV apex to the LV anterolateral and posterolateral sites during RV apical pacing. Simultaneous biventricular pacing was performed at the RV apex and each LV site, and the differences in QRS duration and LV dP/dt_max from those of RV apical pacing were measured.

Results

Thirty-seven patients with anterolateral and posterolateral LV CS branches were included. During RV apical pacing, the average ratio of activation time to QRS duration was higher at the LV anterolateral site than at the LV posterolateral site (0.90 ± 0.06 vs. 0.71 ± 0.11, p < .001). The decreasing ratio of QRS duration and the increasing ratio of LV dP/dt_max were higher at the LV anterolateral site than at the posterolateral site (45.7 ± 18.0% vs. 32.0 ± 17.6%, p < .001; 12.7 ± 2.9% vs. 3.7 ± 8.2%, p < .001, respectively) during biventricular pacing compared with RV apical pacing.

Conclusion

The LV anterolateral site is the preferred LV lead position in patients being upgraded from conventional RV apical pacing to CRT.     

Anatomy of the Coronary Sinus and Epicardial Coronary Venous System in 620 Hearts: An Electrophysiology Perspective

Anatomy of the Coronary Venous System . Introduction: Cannulation of the coronary sinus (CS) is a prerequisite for left ventricular (LV) pacing and certain ablation procedures. The detailed regional anatomy for the coronary veins and potential anatomic causes for difficulty with these procedures has not been established. Methods and Results: Therefore, we performed macroscopic measurements in 620 autopsied hearts (mean age 60 ± 23 years, 44% female). The CS was preserved for analysis in 96%. Sixty‐three percent had a Thebesian valve that covered the posterior aspect of the CS ostium with extension to the superior (50%) and inferior aspects (18%) and was obstructive with fenestrations in 3 specimens. Partial or near occlusive valves were present occasionally at the ostium of the great cardiac vein (Vieussens; 8%) and middle cardiac vein (5%). Ninety‐three percent had left atrial branches, and 41% had at least one branch with lumen > 3 French. For CRT lead placement, the mid‐lateral LV was accessible from the middle cardiac vein (20%), the left posterior vein (92%) or the anterior interventricular vein (86%). Among specimens where the left phrenic nerve was preserved it crossed the LV mid‐lateral wall in 45%. Conclusions: Epicardial coronary vein anatomy is variable, and the mid‐lateral LV wall can potentially be accessed through various tributaries of the epicardial veins. The orientation of the Thebesian valve favors cannulation of the CS from an anterior (ventricular) and inferior approach. Anterobasal, mid‐lateral, and inferior apical LV coronary veins lie in proximity to the course of the phrenic nerve. (J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol, Vol. 24, pp. 1‐6, January 2013)     

超声检查对肥厚型梗阻性心肌病起搏治疗血液动力学变化的探讨

用超声技术探讨起搏器对肥厚型梗阻性心肌病 (HCM)的作用机理。观察 4例HCM(左心导管和造影检查确诊 )患者的如下指标 :①起搏器置入前、后左室梗阻部位形态及运动变化情况 ;②不同起搏间期对左室心肌各部位收缩期运动顺序的影响 ;③观察自主心律与起搏心律对心功能的影响。结果 :①起搏后左室流出道动力性梗阻减轻 (76 .3± 5 2 .8vs 16 1.5± 47.4mmHg ,P <0 .0 5 )。但起搏后 ,肥厚的心肌收缩期梗阻左室流出道现象依然存在。②双腔起搏时 ,左室心肌激动顺序未见变化 ,但传导时限延长 (6 2 .5± 7.4vs 45 .5± 7.7ms,P <0 .0 5 )。③起搏后左室收缩、舒张诸项指标下降。结论 :起搏干扰心肌传导、激动和收缩的正常过程 ,使得其同步性劣于窦性心律时 ,由此可导致左室收缩压力以及狭窄处压力梯度的下降