1例主动固定电极右室间隔部起搏器置入术患者的护理

右室间隔部起搏器置入术是应用主动固定电极导线行心脏特殊部位起搏。安装双腔起搏器的患者行右室流出道间隔部起搏,将心室起搏螺旋电极先后定位于右室心尖部及右室流出道间隔部并测试起搏参数,而在间隔部起搏可以获得接近正常生理的心室激动顺序,有效地避免了起搏对血流动力学和心功能的不良影响,其较心尖部起搏能明显改善心脏动力学指标,室间隔部起搏有利于左右心室协调运动但需借助主动固定电极导线,广西主动固定电极起搏器置入术的病例较少,我科于2007年8月重置入1例主动固定电极右室间隔部起搏器术,经系统的治疗和护理,患者已出院,现报…     

1例主动固定电极右室间隔部起搏器置入术患者的护理

右室间隔部起搏器置人术是应用主动固定电极导线行心脏特殊部位起搏。安装双腔起搏器的患者行右室流出道间隔部起搏，将心室起搏螺旋电极先后定位于右室心尖部及右室流出道间隔部并测试起搏参数，而在间隔部起搏可以获得接近正常生理的心室激动顺序，有效地避免了起搏对血流动力学和心功能的不良影响，     

主动固定电极导线行右室流出道间隔部生理性起搏31例分析

右室心尖部起搏是目前常用的永久起搏方式,但非生理性起搏方式,右室流出道间隔部起搏可以实现近希氏束起搏,从而获得接近生理状态的心室激动顺序和心室同步,这是一种近似生理性的起搏方式,需借助主动固定电极导线。笔者探索临床应用主动固定电极导线行右室流出道间隔部起搏的操作技术和安全性。     

主动固定电极导线行右室流出道间隔部起搏患者二例的护理

心脏永久性起搏器安置术已作为比较成熟的技术运用于临床心律失常患者。由于右室心尖部到位容易、固定简单、脱位率低、起搏可靠，因此，长期以来认为右室心尖部是合适的起搏部位。我院心内科于2007年10-12月先后有2例患者采用主动固定电极导线行右室流出道（right ventricular outflow，RVOT）室间隔部起搏收到了良好的治疗效果，现将护理体会汇报如下。     

右室流出道间隔部置入起搏器对患者生活质量的影响

背景:已有随机对照研究显示右室流出道间隔部起搏对左室同步性及心功能恢复明显优于右室心尖部起搏.但右室流出道间隔部起搏对生活质量的影响国内尚未见报道.目的:应用SF-36量表和超声心动图方法来评估右室流出道间隔部起搏对缓慢性心律失常患者生活质量的影响.设计、时间及地点:病例分析,2005-06/2007-09在广东省心血管病研究所进行.对象:缓慢心律失常患者60例,其中男29例,女31例;年龄(62±18)岁.方法:采用锁骨下静脉穿刺方法置入DDD(R)起搏器,心室电极采用主动固定电极置入于右室流出道间隔部,于置入前和置入后12个月用SF-36量表及超声心动图评估患者生活质量和症状度.主要观察指标:①起搏器置入及起搏参数变化.②生活质量评分变化.③超声心动图评价血流动力学指标变化.结果:全部患者未出现置入并发症,随访12个月无电极移位、阈值增高;右室流出道间隔部起搏治疗12个月躯体功能、躯体角色、肌体疼痛、社会功能、生命力、心理健康和总的健康状况方面高于置入前(P均< 0.01),而情感角色的变化则没有统计学意义(P =0.125);左室舒张末径、左室收缩末内径、左室射血分数和左室充盈时间高于置入前(P均< 0.01),Tei指数明显低于置入前(P < 0.01).结论:对缓慢心律失常患者,右室流出道间隔部起搏治疗能明显改善患者的症状、生活质量和血流动力学指标,未出现置入并发症.     

中心静脉及右室流出道起搏治疗充血性心力衰竭

目的 探讨双心室起搏时左室右室电极安置的有效途径。方法 对一例扩张型心肌病心力衰竭患者行双心室起搏，将左室电极安置在中心静脉，将右室电极安置在右室流出道，形成中心静脉＋右室流出道方式起搏。结果 患者心尖部收缩期杂音消失，心电图QRS时间从0．15秒缩短0．14秒，心功能从Ⅳ级改善为Ⅱ级。结论 中心静脉＋右室流出道方式起搏是双心室起搏的有效可选方法。     

经静脉临时心脏起搏治疗缓慢心律失常合并心力衰竭疗效观察

目的 探讨右室流出道、心尖部起搏对治疗心力衰竭的影响.方法对36例缓慢心律失常合并心力衰竭患者实施经静脉临时起搏,根据心电图记录分为右室流出道、心尖部位起搏,随机将前者设置为实验组(20例),后者为对照组(16例),两组给予相同的治疗心衰方案.结果全部起搏成功,实验组心衰症状稳定需4～10 d,对照组需5～15 d.结论 与心尖部比较,右室流出道起搏更有利于缓慢心律失常合并心力衰竭患者心功能恢复.     

右心室不同部位起搏对心脏结构和左心功能的影响

[目的]对比研究右心室不同部位起搏对患者心脏结构和左心功能的影响.[方法]90例Ⅲ度或高度房室传导阻滞患者, 随机分为三组, A组行右室流入道（RVIS）间隔部起搏,B组行右室流出道（RVOT）间隔部起搏,C组行右心室心尖部（RVA）起搏. 观察三组手术中情况,监测术中血流动力学变化及手术曝光时间,比较三组术后随访的起搏器工作情况,心电图QRS波宽度,左心功能及血浆中B型钠尿肽（BNP）的差异.[结果]术中监测血流动力学,A组及B组明显优于C组.术后随访观察,A组及B组心电图QRS波宽度明显窄于C组,A组及B组具有更好的心脏功能.[结论]右心室间隔部起搏无论右室流出道起搏还是右室流入道间隔部起搏都是安全,有效的,比右室心尖部起搏更有利于双心室电激动的同步性,且长期对心脏结构及心功能影响也较少.     

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.     

心电图引导下紧急床旁临时心脏起搏35例分析

目的：探讨心电图引导下用普通电极导管行紧急床旁临时心脏起搏术的安全性和有效性。方法：35例不同病因所致严重缓慢型心律失常、心脏骤停者,采用非X线条件下,应用普通电极导管,以心腔内心电图引导,体表起搏心电图定位,行紧急床旁临时心脏起搏术。结果：35例患者起搏均获成功,从开始静脉穿刺到完成右心室起搏时间5～20min,平均13min。35例均为右心室起搏,右室心尖部起搏29例,右室流出道起搏5例,右室流人道起搏1例。结论：心腔内心电图引导,体表起搏心电图定位,普通电极导管床旁起搏术是一种效果可靠,操作简便,安全实用的抢救措施,对临床具有重要意义。     

The Road to Right Ventricular Septal Pacing: Techniques and Tools

Prolonged right ventricular (RV) apical pacing is associated with progressive left ventricular dysfunction due to dysynchronous ventricular activation and contraction. RV septal pacing allows a narrower QRS compared to RV apical pacing, which might reflect a more physiological and synchronous ventricular activation. Previous clinical studies, which did not consistently achieve RV septal pacing, were not confirmatory and need to be repeated. This review summarizes the anatomy of the RV septum, the radiographic appearances of pacing leads in the RV, the electrocardiograph correlates of RV septal lead positioning, and the techniques and tools required for implantation of an active‐fixation lead onto the RV septum. Using the described techniques and tools, conventional active‐fixation leads can now be reliably secured to either the RV outflow tract septum or mid‐RV septum with very low complication rates and good long‐term performance. Even though physiologic and hemodynamic studies on true RV septal pacing have not been completed, the detrimental effects of long‐term RV apical pacing are significant enough to suggest that it is now time to leave the RV apex and secure all RV leads onto the septum. (PACE 2010; 888–898)     

经永存左上腔静脉植入起搏电极导线的方法探讨

目的初步探讨经永存左上腔静脉植入起搏电极导线的方法。方法 4例永存左上腔静脉合并右上腔静脉缺如的缓慢性心律失常患者,经左上腔静脉植入右心房和右心室起搏电极导线,心房起搏电极固定于右心耳(4例),心室起搏电极分别固定至右心室间隔部(2例)或心尖部(2例)。术后当天、术后3个月及1年分别测试起搏电极参数。结果 4例患者均成功放置右心房(心耳处)和右心室(间隔部或心尖部)起搏电极导线,随访1年,起搏电极参数良好。结论经左上腔静脉植入起搏电极导线具有一定的挑战性,但通过适当的导丝塑形和操作,通常可将导线固定于右心房心耳部和右心室间隔部或心尖部。     

永久右心室流出道起搏临床评价

目的评价主动固定电极在右心室流出道间隔部起搏应用中的临床疗效和稳定性。方法55例有高度房室传导阻滞的缓慢心律失常患者随机分为2组,27例采用主动固定电极行右心室流出道间隔部起搏（主动固定电极组）,28例采用被动固定电极行右心室心尖部起搏（被动固定电极组）,比较2组电极植入时间和心电图QRS波宽度,电极植入时及随访起搏阚值、感知、阻抗,电极脱位及相关并发症。结果主动固定电极组的植入时间和X线曝光时间均长于被动固定电极组,（25．82±1．84）min vs （20．07±2．45）min、（15．75±1．99）min vs （8．50±1．89）min（均P〈0．05）。主动固定电极组起搏的ORS波时限较被动固定电极组短,（130．104±4．00）ms vs （152．30±10．80）ms（P〈0．05）。主动电极植入组即刻闽值比被动电极组高,（0．71±0．27）V vs （0．51±0．17）V（P〈0．01）,术后随访3个月,2组的起搏阚值、感知差异均无统计学意义,术后3个月时主动电极组阻抗要低于被动电极组,（431．00±76．90）Ω vs （588．39±160．79）Ω（P〈0．01）,未见电极脱位等并发症。结论主动固定电极在右心室流出道间隔部的起搏应用可行而稳定。     

Using the Surface ECG to Identify Right Ventricular Pacing Lead Position: A Cautionary Tale

Chronic right ventricular (RV) apical pacing may lead to the development of heart failure in some patients. Although pacing of the RV septum has been proposed as an alternative, positioning a lead in the true septum has proven challenging. In addition to fluoroscopy at implant, it has been suggested that 12‐lead surface electrocardiogram (ECG) can be used to determine septal lead position; however, studies show this may be inaccurate. We present a case where a change in the ECG QRS axis late after pacemaker insertion with an active fixation lead highlights the difficulties of ECG localization of pacing leads.     

Permanent Interatrial Septal Pacing: Feasibility and Advantages

One hundred eighty-nine implanted atrial pacing leads have been analyzed. A double screw-in active fixation lead was attached to the interatrial septum in eight patients and a J lead in one patient. The right atrial appendage was the site used in the 97 other patients with a double screw-in lead; a J-shaped lead was used in three and an anchored (active fixation) lead in the remaining 80 patients. Though pacing from the interatrial septum has different characteristics of lead stability, it offers a number of advantages over right atrial appendage stimulation.     

Right Ventricular Septal Pacing: A Comparative Study of Outflow Tract and Mid Ventricular Sites

Background: Prolonged right ventricle (RV) apical pacing is associated with left ventricle (LV) dysfunction due to dysynchronous ventricular activation and contraction. Alternative RV pacing sites with a narrower QRS compared to RV pacing might reflect a more physiological and synchronous LV activation. The purpose of this study was to compare the QRS morphology, duration, and suitability of RV outflow tract (RVOT) septal and mid‐RV septal pacing. Methods: Seventeen consecutive patients with indication for dual‐chamber pacing were enrolled in the study. Two standard 58‐cm active fixation leads were passed to the RV and positioned in the RVOT septum and mid‐RV septum using a commercially available septal stylet (model 4140, St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN, USA). QRS duration, morphology, and pacing parameters were compared at the two sites. The RV lead with less‐satisfactory electrical parameters was withdrawn and deployed in the right atrium. Results: Successful positioning of the pacing leads at the RVOT septum and mid‐RV septum was achieved in 15 patients (88.2%). There were no significant differences in the mean stimulation threshold, R‐wave sensing, and lead impedance between the two sites. The QRS duration in the RVOT septum was 151 ± 14 ms and in the mid‐RV septum 145 ± 13 ms (P = 0.150). Conclusions: This prospective observational study shows that septal pacing can be reliably achieved both in the RVOT and mid‐RV with active fixation leads using a specifically shaped stylet. There are no preferences in regard to acute lead performance or paced QRS duration with either position. (PACE 2010; 33:1169–1173)     

动态三维超声灰阶成像在犬心脏起搏电极置放中的初步应用

目的探讨动态三维超声灰阶成像引导犬心脏起搏电极精确定位的可行性.方法采用动态三维超声心动图(3-DE)为主要影像学监测技术,引导6例犬心包吊床模型右心室室间隔、右心室心尖、左心室室间隔及左心室心尖起搏电极置放.结果3-DE在较短时间内引导电极到达目标位置,减少了X线曝光的幅射时间和剂量.3-DE能清晰显示起搏电极与心脏特定结构及心内膜之间的空间位置关系.结论3-DE有助于心脏起搏电极的置放,具有潜在的临床应用前景.     

Variation in pacing impedance: impact of implant site and measurement method

BACKGROUND: Variations in pacing impedance may be observed during implantation of various active fixation pacing leads. However, these variations can be influenced by the nature of the fixation, the implant site, or the measurement method. Here we describe implant dynamics for a 4.1F, catheter-delivered pacemaker lead. METHODS: Endocardial active fixation leads were implanted under direct intracardiac visualization in two right atrial sites and three right ventricular sites in isolated swine (n = 6) and human (n = 4) hearts. Impedance measurements were recorded at each site employing three different measurement techniques-Pacing System Analyzer (PSA) 5311, PSA 2090, and the Impedance Tone Box (Medtronic, Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA)-with four different degrees of lead fixation: helix touching, one turn fixed (1 TF), two turns fixed (2 TF), and overtorqued. RESULTS: Pacing impedances increased from touching to 1 TF to 2 TF at all implant sites in both swine and human hearts. Overtorquing applied to leads was associated with visible distortion at the endocardial tissue-lead interface in at least 60% of swine (18 of 30 implants) and human hearts (nine of 14 implants). Impedance values in the right atrial high septum were significantly larger than in any other implant site (P < 0.05). The three measurement methods did not yield significantly different impedance measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Variations in measured impedances were associated with the nature of implant fixation at all sites in both swine and human hearts.     

Atrial Septal Pacing to Synchronize Atrial Depolarization in Patients with Delayed Interatrial Conduction

The current method of pacing the right atrium from the appendage or free wall is often the source of delayed intraatrial conduction and discoordinate left and right atrial mechanical function. Simultaneous activation of both atria with pacing techniques involving multisite and multilead systems is associated with suppression of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias and improved hemodynamics. In the present study we tested the hypothesis that pacing from a single site of the atrial septum can synchronize atrial depolarization. Five males and two females (mean age 58 ± 6 years) with drug refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) were studied who were candidates for AV junctional ablation. All patients had broad P waves (118 ± 10 ms) on the surface ECG. Multipolar catheters were inserted and the electrograms from the high right atrium (HRA) and proximal, middle, and distal coronary sinus (CS) were recorded. The atrial septum was paced from multiple sites. The site of atrial septum where the timing between HRA and distal CS (d-CS) was ≤ 10 ms was considered the most suitable for simultaneous atrial activation. An active fixation atrial lead was positioned at this site and a standard lead was placed in the ventricle. The interatrial conduction time during sinus rhythm and AAT pacing and the conduction time from the pacing site to the HRA and d-CS during septal pacing were measured. Atrial septal pacing was successful in all patients at sites superior to the CS os near the fossa ovalis. During septal pacing the P waves were inverted in the inferior leads with shortened duration from 118 ± 10 ms to 93 ± 7 ms (P < 0.001), and the conduction time from the pacing site to the HRA and d-CS was 54.3 ± 6.8 ms and 52.8 ± 2.5 ms, respectively. The interatrial conduction time during AAT pacing was shortened in comparison to sinus rhythm (115 ± 18.9 ms vs 97.8 ± 10.3 ms, P < 0.05). In conclusion, simultaneous activation of both atria in patients with prolonged interatrial conduction time can be accomplished by pacing a single site in the atrial septum using a standard active fixation lead placed under electrophysiological study guidance. Such a pacing system allows proper left AV timing and may prove efficacious in preventing various supraventricular tachyarrhythmias.