论文部分内容阅读
目的:观察主动电极在右室流出道间隔部起搏安全性和可行性。方法:80例需起搏器植入的患者,随机入组,采用VVI或DDD起搏模式,右室流出道间隔部起搏(RVOTS组)和右心室心尖部起搏(RVA组)各40例,观察两组在术中及术后的各项参数以及起搏心电图的QRS宽度。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。RVOTS组手术X线曝光时间明显延长(19.8±6.4 vs 10.3±4.8,P<0.01);术中心室的起搏阈值RVOTS组高于RVA组(0.61±0.23 vs 0.48±0.17,P<0.05),但术后1个月及3个月无统计学差异,两组间阻抗、感知在术中及术后无统计学差异,起搏心电图QRS波宽度无统计学差异。结论:主动电极在右室流出道间隔部起搏是安全和可行的。
Objective: To observe the safety and feasibility of active electrode pacing in right ventricular outflow tract. Methods: Eighty patients undergoing pacemaker implantation were enrolled in a randomized trial. VVI or DDD pacing mode, RVOTS and RVVA were performed in 40 patients Cases, observe the two groups in the postoperative and postoperative parameters and QRS width of pacing ECG. Results: The two groups of patients were successfully completed surgery, two cases of each one occurred after electrode dislocation. No serious complications occurred in all the operations. The RVOTS group had a significantly longer X-ray exposure time (19.8 ± 6.4 vs 10.3 ± 4.8, P <0.01). Pacing threshold in RVOTS group was higher than that in RVA group (0.61 ± 0.23 vs 0.48 ± 0.17, P <0.05) However, there was no significant difference between 1 month and 3 months postoperatively. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the impedance and perception during and after surgery. There was no significant difference in QRS wave width between two groups. Conclusion: It is safe and feasible that the active electrode pacing the right ventricular outflow tract space.