Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia · 2011
Hemodynamic stability during biventricular pacing after cardiopulmonary bypass.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Spotnitz Mathew E, Wang Daniel Y, Quinn T Alexander, Richmond Marc E, Rusanov Alexander, Johnston Taylor, Cheng Bin, Cabreriza Santos E, Spotnitz Henry M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To assess the stability of cardiac output, mean arterial pressure, and systemic vascular resistance during biventricular pacing (BiVP) optimization.
DESIGN: Substudy analysis of data collected as part of a randomized controlled study examining the effects of optimized temporary BiVP after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB).
SETTING: A single-center study at a university-affiliated tertiary care hospital.
PARTICIPANTS: Cardiac surgery patients at risk of left ventricular failure after CPB.
INTERVENTIONS: BiVP was optimized immediately after CPB. Atrioventricular delay (7 unique settings) was optimized first, followed by the left ventricular pacing site (3 unique settings) and then the interventricular delay (9 unique settings). Each setting was tested twice for 10 seconds each time. Vasoactive medication and fluid infusion rates were held constant.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Aortic flow velocity and radial artery pressure were digitized, recorded, and averaged over single respiratory cycles. Least squares and linear regression/Wilcoxon analyses were applied to the first 7 patients studied. Subsequently, curvilinear analysis was applied to 15 patients. Changes in mean arterial pressure and systemic vascular resistance were statistically insignificant or too small to be meaningful by least squares analysis. During interventricular synchrony optimization, cardiac output and mean arterial pressure decreased (mean changes -5.7% and -2.5%, respectively; with standard errors 2.3% and 1.5%, respectively), whereas SVR increased (mean change 3.1% with standard error 3.4%). Only the change in cardiac output was statistically significant (p = 0.043). Curvilinear fits to data for 15 patients demonstrated progressive hemodynamic stability over the total testing period.
CONCLUSION: BiVP optimization may be done safely in patients after CPB. With continuous monitoring of mean arterial pressure and cardiac output, the procedure results in no harmful hemodynamic perturbation.
DESIGN: Substudy analysis of data collected as part of a randomized controlled study examining the effects of optimized temporary BiVP after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB).
SETTING: A single-center study at a university-affiliated tertiary care hospital.
PARTICIPANTS: Cardiac surgery patients at risk of left ventricular failure after CPB.
INTERVENTIONS: BiVP was optimized immediately after CPB. Atrioventricular delay (7 unique settings) was optimized first, followed by the left ventricular pacing site (3 unique settings) and then the interventricular delay (9 unique settings). Each setting was tested twice for 10 seconds each time. Vasoactive medication and fluid infusion rates were held constant.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Aortic flow velocity and radial artery pressure were digitized, recorded, and averaged over single respiratory cycles. Least squares and linear regression/Wilcoxon analyses were applied to the first 7 patients studied. Subsequently, curvilinear analysis was applied to 15 patients. Changes in mean arterial pressure and systemic vascular resistance were statistically insignificant or too small to be meaningful by least squares analysis. During interventricular synchrony optimization, cardiac output and mean arterial pressure decreased (mean changes -5.7% and -2.5%, respectively; with standard errors 2.3% and 1.5%, respectively), whereas SVR increased (mean change 3.1% with standard error 3.4%). Only the change in cardiac output was statistically significant (p = 0.043). Curvilinear fits to data for 15 patients demonstrated progressive hemodynamic stability over the total testing period.
CONCLUSION: BiVP optimization may be done safely in patients after CPB. With continuous monitoring of mean arterial pressure and cardiac output, the procedure results in no harmful hemodynamic perturbation.