{"title":"右心室起搏频率对左心室功能和肺动脉压的影响。","authors":"Zaher Fanari, Sumaya Hammami, Muhammad Baraa Hammami, Safa Hammami, Mossaab Shuraih","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We studied the effect of the frequency of right ventricular (HV) pacing on left ventricle (LV) function pulmonary hypertension.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>The incidence of new or worsening pulmonary hypertension after permanent pacemaker (PPM) or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (lCD) lead placement has not been well investigated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed the charts of all patients undergoing PPM or ICD lead placement in our electrophysiology laboratory from December 2007 to December 2012.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and six patients (120 with PPM and 86 with ICD) had baseline echocardiography within six months before, and a follow up study at least six months after lead insertion. The mean age was 74 ± 14 years; 56 percent were men. The follow-up period was 29 ± 19 months. RV pacing was associated with a worsening of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with high frequency of RV (55 ± 16 vs. 44 ± 18; P = 0.001), but not with those with low frequency pacing (55 ± 16 vs. 54 ± 17; P = 0.87). Similarly, RV pacing was associated with a worsening in both right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) (42 ± 14 vs. 48 ± 15; P = 0.01) and Pulmonary Artery Systolic Pressure (PASP) (50 ± 17 vs. 56 ± 18; P = 0.005) in patients with high frequency RV, but not in those with low frequency RV pacing [RVSP (43 ± 12 vs. 46 ± 13; P = 0.06) and PASP (51 ± 15 vs. 54 ± 16; P = 0.11)].</p><p><strong>Onclusion: </strong>PPM or IICD lead implantation worsens LV function and pulmonary hypertension in patients with high frequency of RV pacing frequency. This is probably caused by the mechanical dyssynchrony induced by RV pacing.</p>","PeriodicalId":75779,"journal":{"name":"Delaware medical journal","volume":"87 8","pages":"244-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effects of Right Ventricular Apical Pacing Frequency on Left Ventricle Function and Pulmonary Artery Pressure.\",\"authors\":\"Zaher Fanari, Sumaya Hammami, Muhammad Baraa Hammami, Safa Hammami, Mossaab Shuraih\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We studied the effect of the frequency of right ventricular (HV) pacing on left ventricle (LV) function pulmonary hypertension.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>The incidence of new or worsening pulmonary hypertension after permanent pacemaker (PPM) or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (lCD) lead placement has not been well investigated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed the charts of all patients undergoing PPM or ICD lead placement in our electrophysiology laboratory from December 2007 to December 2012.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and six patients (120 with PPM and 86 with ICD) had baseline echocardiography within six months before, and a follow up study at least six months after lead insertion. The mean age was 74 ± 14 years; 56 percent were men. The follow-up period was 29 ± 19 months. RV pacing was associated with a worsening of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with high frequency of RV (55 ± 16 vs. 44 ± 18; P = 0.001), but not with those with low frequency pacing (55 ± 16 vs. 54 ± 17; P = 0.87). Similarly, RV pacing was associated with a worsening in both right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) (42 ± 14 vs. 48 ± 15; P = 0.01) and Pulmonary Artery Systolic Pressure (PASP) (50 ± 17 vs. 56 ± 18; P = 0.005) in patients with high frequency RV, but not in those with low frequency RV pacing [RVSP (43 ± 12 vs. 46 ± 13; P = 0.06) and PASP (51 ± 15 vs. 54 ± 16; P = 0.11)].</p><p><strong>Onclusion: </strong>PPM or IICD lead implantation worsens LV function and pulmonary hypertension in patients with high frequency of RV pacing frequency. This is probably caused by the mechanical dyssynchrony induced by RV pacing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75779,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Delaware medical journal\",\"volume\":\"87 8\",\"pages\":\"244-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Delaware medical journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Delaware medical journal","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
摘要
目的:探讨右心室起搏频率对肺动脉高压患者左心室功能的影响。背景:永久性起搏器(PPM)或植入式心律转复除颤器(lCD)导线置入后新发或加重肺动脉高压的发生率尚未得到很好的研究。方法:回顾2007年12月至2012年12月在我院电生理实验室接受PPM或ICD导联的所有患者的病历。结果:236例患者(120例PPM和86例ICD)在插入导联前6个月内进行了基线超声心动图检查,并在插入导联后至少6个月进行了随访研究。平均年龄74±14岁;56%是男性。随访29±19个月。右心室起搏与左心室射血分数(LVEF)的恶化相关(55±16 vs. 44±18;P = 0.001),但与低频起搏组无关(55±16∶54±17;P = 0.87)。同样,右心室起搏与右心室收缩压(RVSP)恶化相关(42±14 vs 48±15;P = 0.01)和肺动脉收缩压(PASP)(50±17∶56±18;P = 0.005),而低频起搏[RVSP]患者的差异无统计学意义(43±12∶46±13;P = 0.06)和PASP(51±15∶54±16;P = 0.11)]。结论:PPM或IICD导联植入加重左室起搏频率高的患者左室功能和肺动脉高压。这可能是由右心室起搏引起的机械非同步性引起的。
The Effects of Right Ventricular Apical Pacing Frequency on Left Ventricle Function and Pulmonary Artery Pressure.
Objective: We studied the effect of the frequency of right ventricular (HV) pacing on left ventricle (LV) function pulmonary hypertension.
Background: The incidence of new or worsening pulmonary hypertension after permanent pacemaker (PPM) or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (lCD) lead placement has not been well investigated.
Methods: We reviewed the charts of all patients undergoing PPM or ICD lead placement in our electrophysiology laboratory from December 2007 to December 2012.
Results: Two hundred and six patients (120 with PPM and 86 with ICD) had baseline echocardiography within six months before, and a follow up study at least six months after lead insertion. The mean age was 74 ± 14 years; 56 percent were men. The follow-up period was 29 ± 19 months. RV pacing was associated with a worsening of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with high frequency of RV (55 ± 16 vs. 44 ± 18; P = 0.001), but not with those with low frequency pacing (55 ± 16 vs. 54 ± 17; P = 0.87). Similarly, RV pacing was associated with a worsening in both right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) (42 ± 14 vs. 48 ± 15; P = 0.01) and Pulmonary Artery Systolic Pressure (PASP) (50 ± 17 vs. 56 ± 18; P = 0.005) in patients with high frequency RV, but not in those with low frequency RV pacing [RVSP (43 ± 12 vs. 46 ± 13; P = 0.06) and PASP (51 ± 15 vs. 54 ± 16; P = 0.11)].
Onclusion: PPM or IICD lead implantation worsens LV function and pulmonary hypertension in patients with high frequency of RV pacing frequency. This is probably caused by the mechanical dyssynchrony induced by RV pacing.