盐水灌注导管与接触压力导管在房颤消融中的疗效及安全性比较  

A randomized comparison of atial fibrillation ablation using standard saline-irrigated catheter and contact-force catheter

作　　者：文俊杰[1] 罗素新[2] 何泉[2] 

机构地区：[1]广安市人民医院心内科,四川广安638000 [2]重庆医科大学附属第一医院心内科,重庆400016

出　　处：《西部医学》2016年第3期354-357,364,共5页Medical Journal of West China

基　　金：国家自然科学基金面上项目(81270210)

摘　　要：目的探讨盐水灌注导管与接触压力导管在房颤消融中的临床疗效及安全性。方法将2014年1月-12月于重庆医科大学附一院心内科住院行房颤导管消融的102例患者,采用连续随机数字法分为普通盐水灌注导管消融组50例与接触压力导管消融组52例,比较两组患者在手术操作时间、X线曝光时间、消融时间方面的差异,以及术后窦性心律维持率、导管消融即刻参数及并发症发生情况。结果普通盐水灌注消融与接触压力导管消融两组患者术后窦性心律维持情况差异无统计学意义（66%vs68%,P〉0.05）,但普通盐水灌注消融组的整个手术时间、X射线曝光时间、导管消融时间较接触压力导管消融组有所增加,但两组手术相关并发症差异无统计学意义（P=0.86）。结论接触压力导管较普通盐水灌注导管消融房颤能缩短整个手术时间、X射线曝光时间及导管消融时间,但未进一步增加术后窦性心律维持率,是一种安全有效的房颤治疗方法。Objective To compare the curative effect and security of atial fibrillation ablation using standard salineirrigated catheter versus contact-force catheter.Methods 102 patients with catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation were divided into normal saline irrigation catheter ablation group（50cases）and the contact pressure catheter ablation group（52cases）.The surgical operation time,X-ray exposure time,ablation time differences,and postoperative sinus rhythm maintain rate and catheter ablation instantly parameters and complications were observed.Results The rates of sinus rhythm maintenance were not significantly different between the two groups.The normal saline-irrigated catheter ablation could increase whole operation time,radiation exposure time,and mean catheter ablation application times.The complication incidence between the two groups were not significantly different（P=0.86）.Conclusion Contact-force catheter can reduces operation,radiation exposure,and mean catheter ablation application times,but cannot increase the rate of sinus rhythm maintenance in patients,which is safe and effective.

关 键 词：接触压力导管 心房颤动 导管消融 临床疗效 安全性 

分 类 号：R541.75[医药卫生—心血管疾病]