最小化心室起搏模式的临床比较  

Clinical comparison of minimizing ventricular pacing mode

作　　者：张敏[1,2] 顾刚 沈永初[1] 吴立群[1] 

机构地区：[1]上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院心内科卫生部心律失常介入技术培训基地,上海200025 [2]贵州省六盘水市首钢水城钢铁集团有限公司总医院内二科,贵州553028

出　　处：《上海交通大学学报（医学版）》2011年第6期828-831,共4页Journal of Shanghai Jiao tong University:Medical Science

摘　　要：目的评估起搏器减少右心室起搏程序模式的临床疗效和安全性。方法因病态窦房结综合征而植入Medtronic AdaptaADD01型双腔起搏器的患者32例,分别以心室起搏管理(MVP)模式、固定延长房室间期(LAVD)模式和增强的房室间期自动搜索(Search AV+)模式起搏2个月后,比较此三种能减少右心室起搏工作模式的心室起搏百分比及心律失常情况。结果在6个月的随访中,所有患者未观察到与起搏器相关的房性和室性心律失常及其他不良反应事件。MVP模式下,心室起搏百分比最低,为0.35%,明显低于Search AV+模式的0.70%和LAVD模式的0.65%,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);Search AV+模式下的心室起搏百分比略高于LAVD模式,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论在最小化心室起搏策略中,MVP模式优于Search AV+模式和LAVD模式。Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of minimizing ventricular pacing mode.Methods The Medtronic Adapta ADD01 pacemakers were implanted in 32 patients with sick sinus syndrome.The percentages of ventricular pacing and incidences of arrhythmia were compared two months after application of managed ventricular pacing(MVP) mode,fixed long extension of atrioventricular delay(LAVD) mode and enhanced automatic atrioventricular interval search(Search AV+) mode.Results Patients were followed up for 6 months,and no pacemaker-associated atrial and ventricular arrhythmias and other adverse events were observed.In MVP mode,the percentage of ventricular pacing(0.35%) was significantly lower than those in LAVD mode(0.65%) and Search AV+ mode(0.7%)(P<0.05).Compared with LAVD mode,Search AV+ mode mildly increased the percentage of ventricular pacing(P>0.05).Conclusion MVP mode is better than Search AV+ mode and LAVD mode in minimizing ventricular pacing.

关 键 词：起搏器 最小化心室起搏 心室起搏管理 

分 类 号：R541.74[医药卫生—心血管疾病]