The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2008
Predictors affecting durability of epicardial pacemaker leads in pediatric patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Murayama Hiroomi, Maeda Masanobu, Sakurai Hajime, Usui Akihiko, Ueda Yuichi
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Despite pacemaker therapy in children and adolescents favoring an initial epicardial approach, predictors of lead failure have not been well clarified. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term outcomes and to determine predictors affecting lead durability in pediatric pacing therapy.
METHODS: We reviewed the outcomes of 109 consecutive pacing leads implanted in 55 patients (median age, 5.2 years; range, 31 days-15.8 years), including 38 atrial and 71 ventricular leads. They consisted of 58 (53%) fishhooks, 37 (34%) screw-in leads, and 14 (13%) steroid-eluting suture-on leads. Seventy (64%) were implanted in patients with structural heart disease.
RESULTS: The leads were followed for a median of 6.4 years (range, 3 days-22.9 years). Lead failure occurred in 29 leads (27%; median of 8.4 years after implantation). Exit block or elevation of pacing threshold was the most common cause (n = 18), but failures did not directly cause patient death. The overall 1-, 5-, 10-, and 15-year lead survivals were 100%, 89.0%, 72.5%, and 55.5%, respectively. Multivariate Cox analysis revealed concurrent structural heart disease (relative risk, 2.85; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-6.42; P = .011) to be the only significant predictor of lead failure.
CONCLUSIONS: Epicardial leads provide a reliable technique for managing rhythmic disturbance problems in the pediatric population. The only significant predictor of lead failure is the presence of structural heart disease.
METHODS: We reviewed the outcomes of 109 consecutive pacing leads implanted in 55 patients (median age, 5.2 years; range, 31 days-15.8 years), including 38 atrial and 71 ventricular leads. They consisted of 58 (53%) fishhooks, 37 (34%) screw-in leads, and 14 (13%) steroid-eluting suture-on leads. Seventy (64%) were implanted in patients with structural heart disease.
RESULTS: The leads were followed for a median of 6.4 years (range, 3 days-22.9 years). Lead failure occurred in 29 leads (27%; median of 8.4 years after implantation). Exit block or elevation of pacing threshold was the most common cause (n = 18), but failures did not directly cause patient death. The overall 1-, 5-, 10-, and 15-year lead survivals were 100%, 89.0%, 72.5%, and 55.5%, respectively. Multivariate Cox analysis revealed concurrent structural heart disease (relative risk, 2.85; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-6.42; P = .011) to be the only significant predictor of lead failure.
CONCLUSIONS: Epicardial leads provide a reliable technique for managing rhythmic disturbance problems in the pediatric population. The only significant predictor of lead failure is the presence of structural heart disease.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdolescentArrhythmias, CardiacCardiac Pacing, ArtificialChildChild, PreschoolCohort StudiesElectrocardiographyElectrodes, ImplantedEquipment FailureEquipment SafetyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHeart Defects, CongenitalHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleMultivariate AnalysisPacemaker, ArtificialProbabilityProportional Hazards ModelsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentSeverity of Illness IndexSurvival AnalysisTreatment Outcome