ESC heart failure · 2023
Feasibility of physiological pacing rate in cardiac resynchronization therapy.
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.
Spaggiari Caio V, de Siqueira Sergio F, de Oliveira Camila Parente, Guiarão Gomes Cinthya I, Alves Maria Janieire de N N, Filho Martino Martinelli
Аннотация
AIMS: Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves functional capacity in heart failure patients, a blunted heart rate (HR) response remains after treatment. So we aimed to evaluate the feasibility of the physiological pacing rate (PPR) in CRT patients.
METHODS: A cohort of 30 clinical mildly symptomatic CRT patients underwent the six-minute walk test (6MWT). During the 6MWT, HR, blood pressure, and maximum walking distance were assessed. The measurements were obtained in a pre to post manner, with CRT at nominal settings and with the physiological phase (CRT PPR), in which HR was increased by 10% above the maximum HR achieved previously. The CRT cohort also comprised a matched control group (CRT CG). In the CRT CG, the 6MWT was repeated after the standard evaluation with no PPR. The evaluations were blinded for patients and for the 6MWT evaluator.
RESULTS: During the 6MWT, CRT PPR led to an increase in walking distance of 40.5 m (9.2%; P < 0.0001) when compared with baseline trial. Additionally, CRT PPR increased the maximum walking distance compared with CRT CG 479.3 ± 68.9 m vs. 420.3 ± 44.8 m, respectively, P = 0.001. In the CRT CG, CRT PPR increased the variation in walking distance, compared with baseline trials, respectively 2.40 ± 3.8% vs. 9.25 ± 7.0%, P = 0.007.
CONCLUSIONS: In mildly symptomatic CRT patients PPR is feasible, leading to improvements in functional capacity. In this regard, the efficacy of PPR must be confirmed by controlled randomized trials.
METHODS: A cohort of 30 clinical mildly symptomatic CRT patients underwent the six-minute walk test (6MWT). During the 6MWT, HR, blood pressure, and maximum walking distance were assessed. The measurements were obtained in a pre to post manner, with CRT at nominal settings and with the physiological phase (CRT PPR), in which HR was increased by 10% above the maximum HR achieved previously. The CRT cohort also comprised a matched control group (CRT CG). In the CRT CG, the 6MWT was repeated after the standard evaluation with no PPR. The evaluations were blinded for patients and for the 6MWT evaluator.
RESULTS: During the 6MWT, CRT PPR led to an increase in walking distance of 40.5 m (9.2%; P < 0.0001) when compared with baseline trial. Additionally, CRT PPR increased the maximum walking distance compared with CRT CG 479.3 ± 68.9 m vs. 420.3 ± 44.8 m, respectively, P = 0.001. In the CRT CG, CRT PPR increased the variation in walking distance, compared with baseline trials, respectively 2.40 ± 3.8% vs. 9.25 ± 7.0%, P = 0.007.
CONCLUSIONS: In mildly symptomatic CRT patients PPR is feasible, leading to improvements in functional capacity. In this regard, the efficacy of PPR must be confirmed by controlled randomized trials.