论文部分内容阅读
目的比较右室主动电极和被动电极导线应用结果,探讨主动螺旋电极在右室流出道间隔部(RVS)起搏中的可行性及安全性。方法选择60例具备永久性起搏器植入指征的患者,30例采用主动固定电极行RVS起搏(主动固定电极组),30例采用被动固定电极行右室心尖部(RVA)起搏(被动固定电极组),测定有关参数并随访观察。结果两组患者均顺利完成手术,未出现严重并发症。主动固定电极组电极置入即刻起搏阈值、固定次数、曝光时间均明显高于被动固定电极组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05);两组电极置入即刻电极阻抗及感知阈值的差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。术后1、3个月时,两组各起搏参数的差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。两组患者均未见电极脱位。结论使用主动固定电极行RVS起搏是安全可行的。
Objective To compare the feasibility and safety of active helical electrodes in right ventricular outflow tract septal pacing (RVS) pacing. Methods Sixty patients with indications of permanent pacemaker implantation were selected. Thirty patients underwent RVS pacing (active fixed electrode group) with active fixed electrode and 30 patients with passive fixed electrode right ventricular apical (RVA) pacing (Passive fixed electrode group), determination of the relevant parameters and follow-up observation. Results The two groups of patients successfully completed the operation without serious complications. The electrodes of active fixed electrode group were placed into immediate pacing threshold, fixed number of times and exposure time were significantly higher than those of passive fixed electrode group (all P <0.05) The difference was not statistically significant (all P> 0.05). At 1 month and 3 months after operation, there was no significant difference in pacing parameters between the two groups (all P> 0.05). Electrode dislocation was not seen in either group. Conclusion The use of active fixed electrode RVS pacing is safe and feasible.