首页|左束支起搏在持续性心房颤动伴慢心室率患者中的临床疗效

左束支起搏在持续性心房颤动伴慢心室率患者中的临床疗效

扫码查看
目的 观察左束支起搏(left bundle branch pacing,LBBP)治疗持续性心房颤动(简称房颤)合并慢心室率患者的临床有效性和安全性。方法 选取因持续性房颤合并慢心室率行起搏治疗的患者 56 例,依据心室起搏电极植入部位将其分为右心室间隔部起搏(right ventricular septal pacing,RVSP)组(29 例)和LBBP 组(27 例),并根据临床症状及相关检查结果,将各组进一步分为心力衰竭(简称心衰)亚组和非心衰亚组,观察两组患者术中及术后 12个月起搏参数(如阈值、感知和阻抗)、心电图、心脏超声和血浆脑钠肽前体(NT-proBNP)水平的变化,以及起搏相关并发症、心衰再住院率、新发脑梗死和全因死亡等情况。结果 ① 两组间起搏参数比较差异均无统计学意义(P均>0。05),两组心衰患者术后 12 个月的NT-proBNP水平较术前均有下降,但RVSP 组心衰亚组下降不明显(P>0。05)。② RVSP 组与术前比较,术后12 个月的LVEF、LVDd差异无统计学意义(P均>0。05);LAD显著增大(P<0。05),二尖瓣反流明显加重(P<0。05)。LBBP组与术前比较,术后 12 个月LAD和二尖瓣反流均无明显变化(P>0。05);心衰患者术后12 个月LVEF升高,LVDd下降(P均<0。05)。③ 与术前比较,两组QRS波时限均有延长(P均<0。05),且RVSP组明显长于LBBP组(P<0。05)。④两组起搏相关并发症和心脑血管事件差异无统计学意义(P>0。05),再住院率RVSP 组高于LBBP 组(P<0。05)。结论 LBBP在持续性房颤伴慢心室率患者中有助于延缓或逆转心衰患者左心室重构,改善心脏功能,降低心衰再住院率。LBBP应作为慢心室率房颤患者首选的起搏治疗方法。
Clinical efficacy of left bundle branch pacing in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation complicating slow ventricular rate
Objective To observe the clinical efficacy and safety of left bundle branch pacing(LBBP)in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation(PAF)complicating slow ventricular rate.Methods Fifty-six patients who had undergone pacing treatment due to PAF complicating slow ventricular rate were selected.The patients were divided into right ventricular septal pacing(RVSP)group(29 cases)and LBBP group(27 cases)based on the implantation site of ventricular pacing electrode.Each group was further divided into heart failure(HF)and non-HF subgroups according to clinical symptoms and related examination results.The changes of pacing parameters(such as threshold,perception and impedance),ECG,echocardiography,and plasma pro-brain natriuretic peptide(NT-proBNP)were observed during operation and 12 months after operation.Other conditions including pacing related complications,re-hospitalization due to HF,newly emerging cerebral infarction and all-cause death were also observed.Results(ⅰ)There is no statistically significant difference in pacing parameters between the two groups(P>0.05).The NT-proBNP level of HF patients in both subgroups decreases 12 months after surgery compared with that before,however its reduction in the HF subgroup of the RVSP group is not significant(P>0.05).(ⅱ)In the RVSP group,there is no significant difference in LVEF or LVDd 12 months after surgery compared with that before(P>0.05);LAD signific antly increases(P<0.05)while mitral regurgitation is obviously worsened(P<0.05).In the LBBP group,there is no significant change in LAD or mitral regurgitation 12 months after surgery compared with that before(P>0.05);LVEF increases while LVDd decreases in those with HF 12 months after surgery(P<0.05).(ⅲ)Compared with that before operation,QRS complex duration is prolonged in both groups(P<0.05),and its value in the RVSP group is significantly greater than that in the LBBP group(P<0.05).(ⅳ)There is no significant difference in pacing related complications or cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events between the two groups(P>0.05);the re-hospitalization rate in the RVSP group is higher than that in the LBBP group(P<0.05).Conclusion Among patients with PAF complicated by slow ventricular rate,LBBP helps to delay or reverse left ventricular remodeling of those with HF,improve cardiac function,and reduce readmission rate due to HF.LBBP should be recommended as the preferred pacing treatment method for atrial fibrillation patients with slow ventricular rate.

atrial fibrillationslow ventricular ratecardiac pacemakercardiac functioncardiac ultrasound

张宇航、王岳松、杨达、董学滨、邵旭武、王学忠

展开 >

243000 安徽 马鞍山,安徽医科大学马鞍山临床学院(马鞍山市人民医院)心血管内科,安徽医科大学第五临床医学院

心房颤动 慢心室率 心脏起搏器 心功能 心脏超声

马鞍山市科技计划项目

YL2019-04

2024

实用心电学杂志
江苏大学

实用心电学杂志

影响因子:0.648
ISSN:2095-9354
年,卷(期):2024.33(1)
  • 5