[Deleterious effects of apical right ventricular stimulation. Should we change our standard method of pacemaker implantation?].

Carlo Pignalberi, Renato Pietro Ricci, Massimo Santini
{"title":"[Deleterious effects of apical right ventricular stimulation. Should we change our standard method of pacemaker implantation?].","authors":"Carlo Pignalberi,&nbsp;Renato Pietro Ricci,&nbsp;Massimo Santini","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Up to now the apical right ventricle one is the best pacemaker implantation. As a matter of fact this site is easily reachable by catheter and dislocations are few. Nevertheless evidence from the literature demonstrates dyssynchrony in myocardial contraction pattern, diastolic dysfunction and mismatch in perfusion and innervation. For this reason alternative sites of stimulation have been tested. One of these is represented by the right ventricular outflow tract. Some studies have compared this site to the apical one, showing a better cardiac index in the former; moreover QRS was narrower and fewer perfusional defects have been found. On the contrary, other studies did not show any significant differences between these two sites of stimulation. In order to obtain cardiac resynchronization, biventricular pacing, has been introduced, consisting in the contemporary stimulation of the lateral wall of both ventricles from a cardiac vein, originating from the coronary sinus. It has been proposed a bifocal stimulation, in which we introduce one catheter into the apex and another one in the right ventricular outflow tract: in this case QRS complex is narrower but cardiac output is not increased. A newer pacing technique is represented by direct His bundle stimulation. We can obtain a narrow QRS complex, like the physiological one. So we might solve problems related to intraventricular dyssynchrony.</p>","PeriodicalId":80290,"journal":{"name":"Italian heart journal. Supplement : official journal of the Italian Federation of Cardiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Italian heart journal. Supplement : official journal of the Italian Federation of Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Up to now the apical right ventricle one is the best pacemaker implantation. As a matter of fact this site is easily reachable by catheter and dislocations are few. Nevertheless evidence from the literature demonstrates dyssynchrony in myocardial contraction pattern, diastolic dysfunction and mismatch in perfusion and innervation. For this reason alternative sites of stimulation have been tested. One of these is represented by the right ventricular outflow tract. Some studies have compared this site to the apical one, showing a better cardiac index in the former; moreover QRS was narrower and fewer perfusional defects have been found. On the contrary, other studies did not show any significant differences between these two sites of stimulation. In order to obtain cardiac resynchronization, biventricular pacing, has been introduced, consisting in the contemporary stimulation of the lateral wall of both ventricles from a cardiac vein, originating from the coronary sinus. It has been proposed a bifocal stimulation, in which we introduce one catheter into the apex and another one in the right ventricular outflow tract: in this case QRS complex is narrower but cardiac output is not increased. A newer pacing technique is represented by direct His bundle stimulation. We can obtain a narrow QRS complex, like the physiological one. So we might solve problems related to intraventricular dyssynchrony.

心尖右心室刺激的有害影响。我们是否应该改变心脏起搏器植入的标准方法?
到目前为止,右室尖部是最佳的起搏器植入位置。事实上,这个部位很容易通过导管到达,脱位很少。然而,文献证据显示心肌收缩模式不同步,舒张功能障碍,灌注和神经支配不匹配。由于这个原因,已经测试了其他刺激部位。其中一个以右心室流出道为代表。一些研究将这一部位与心尖部位进行了比较,发现前者的心脏指数更好;QRS更窄,血流缺陷更少。相反,其他研究没有显示这两个刺激部位之间有任何显著差异。为了获得心脏再同步,双心室起搏已经被引入,包括来自冠状窦的心脏静脉对两个心室侧壁的当代刺激。已经提出了双焦点刺激,其中我们在心尖引入一根导管,在右心室流出道引入另一根导管:在这种情况下,QRS复合物变窄,但心输出量没有增加。一种较新的起搏技术是直接刺激希氏束。我们可以得到一个狭窄的QRS复合体,就像生理上的一样。所以我们可以解决与脑室内不同步相关的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信