首页> 外文期刊>Europace: European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology >Difference in percentage of ventricular pacing between two algorithms for minimizing ventricular pacing: results of the IDEAL RVP (Identify the Best Algorithm for Reducing Unnecessary Right Ventricular Pacing) study.
【24h】

Difference in percentage of ventricular pacing between two algorithms for minimizing ventricular pacing: results of the IDEAL RVP (Identify the Best Algorithm for Reducing Unnecessary Right Ventricular Pacing) study.

机译:两种最小化心室起搏的算法之间的心室起搏百分比差异:IDEAL RVP(确定减少不必要的右心室起搏的最佳算法)研究的结果。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

AIMS: Managed ventricular pacing (MVP) and Search AV+ are representative dual-chamber pacing algorithms for minimizing ventricular pacing (VP). This randomized, crossover study aimed to examine the difference in ability to reduce percentage of VP (%VP) between these two algorithms. METHODS AND RESULTS: Symptomatic bradyarrhythmia patients implanted with a pacemaker equipped with both algorithms (Adapta DR, Medtronic) were enrolled. The %VPs of the patients during two periods were compared: 1 month operation of either one of the two algorithms for each period. All patients were categorized into subgroups according to the atrioventricular block (AVB) status at baseline: no AVB (nAVB), first-degree AVB (1AVB), second-degree AVB (2AVB), episodic third-degree AVB (e3AVB), and persistent third-degree AVB (p3AVB). Data were available from 127 patients for the analysis. For all patient subgroups, except for p3AVB category, the median %VPs were lower during the MVP operation than those during the Search AV+ (nAVB: 0.2 vs. 0.8%, P < 0.0001; 1AVB: 2.3 vs. 27.4%, P = 0.001; 2AVB: 16.4% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.0052; e3AVB: 37.7% vs. 92.7%, P = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: Managed ventricular pacing algorithm, when compared with Search AV+, offers further %VP reduction in patients implanted with a dual-chamber pacemaker, except for patients diagnosed with persistent loss of atrioventricular conduction.
机译:目的:受控心室起搏(MVP)和Search AV +是代表性的双室起搏算法,用于最小化心室起搏(VP)。这项随机,交叉研究旨在研究这两种算法在降低VP百分比(%VP)的能力上的差异。方法和结果:症状性心律失常患者植入了装有两种算法的起搏器(Adapta DR,Medtronic)。比较了两个时期患者的%VPs:每个时期两种算法之一的1个月手术。根据基线时的房室传导阻滞(AVB)状态,将所有患者分为亚组:无AVB(nAVB),一级AVB(1AVB),二级AVB(2AVB),发作性三级AVB(e3AVB)和持久性三级AVB(p3AVB)。可以从127位患者获得数据进行分析。对于所有患者亚组,除p3AVB类别外,在MVP手术中的中位%VPs均低于Search AV +期间的中值(nAVB:0.2对0.8%,P <0.0001; 1AVB:2.3对27.4%,P = 0.001 ; 2AVB:16.4%和91.9%,P = 0.0052; e3AVB:37.7%和92.7%,P = 0.0003)。结论:与Search AV +相比,有管理的心室起搏算法可为植入双腔起搏器的患者进一步降低%VP,但诊断为持续性房室传导丧失的患者除外。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号