论文部分内容阅读
本文旨在评价和比较导管介导的直流和射频电流消蚀WPW综合征病人的安全性和效果。对象114例,平均年龄47±6岁,伴有由旁路引起的症状性快速心律失常(房性折返性心动过速、快速型房颤),进行导管消蚀。使用直流电的病人52例,有53个旁路;使用射频的病人62例,有75个旁路;两组的电生理学参数相似。结果,于消蚀后,使用直流电的53个旁路中50个(94%)消蚀成功,50个旁路中有2个旁路早期恢复传导而需要再次消蚀;使用射频电流的75个旁路中72个(96%)消蚀成功。有3个旁路未成功,后者经直流电消蚀成功。在随访期间(直流电组14～27月,射频组8～13月),成功消蚀的病例无一发生过心动过速。直流电消蚀组的合并症有短暂性低血压2例、意外性房室传导阻滞1例、右下肺空气滞留(trapping)2例;射频消蚀组的合并
This article aims to evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy of catheter-mediated DC and RF current ablation in patients with WPW syndrome. Subjects: 114 patients with a mean age of 47 ± 6 years with symptomatic tachyarrhythmia due to bypass (atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia and atrial fibrillation) and catheter ablation. There were 52 patients with DC, 53 with bypass; 62 with RF, with 75 bypasses; electrophysiological parameters were similar in both groups. As a result, 50 (94%) of the 53 shunts using direct current eroded successfully after erode, and 2 of the 50 shunts resumed early and needed to be eroded again; 75 of the radio frequency currents 72 (96%) of the by-pass eroded successfully. Three bypass failed, the latter by DC erosion success. During the follow-up period (DC group 14 ~ 27 months, RF group 8 ~ 13 months), none of the successful eradication cases had tachycardia. In DC ablation group, there were 2 cases with transient hypotension, 1 case with unexpected AV block and 2 cases with right tracheal airlogging. The combination of RFA