Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2018
Zero-fluoroscopy permanent pacemaker implantation using Ensite NavX system: Clinical viability or fanciful technique?
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Guo Ping, Qiu Jie, Wang Yan, Chen Guangzhi, Proietti Riccardo, Fadhle Al-Selmi, Zhao Chunxia, Wen Wang Dao
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Fluoroscopy is the imaging modality routinely used for cardiac device implantation and electrophysiological procedures. Due to the rising concern regarding the harmful effects of radiation exposure to both the patients and operation staffs, novel 3D mapping systems have been developed and implemented in electrophysiological procedure for the navigation of catheters inside the heart chambers. Their applicability in cardiac device implantation has been rarely reported. Our aim is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of permanent pacemaker implantation without fluoroscopy.
METHODS AND RESULTS: From January 2012 to June 2016, six patients (50 ± 15 years, four of six were female, one of who was at the 25th week of gestation) who underwent permanent pacemaker implantation were included (zero-fluoroscopy group). Data from 20 consecutive cases of implantation performed under fluoroscopy guidance were chosen as a control group (fluoroscopy group). Total implantation procedure time for single-chamber pacemaker was 51.3 ± 13.1 minutes in the zero-fluoroscopy group and 42.6 ± 7.4 minutes in the fluoroscopy group (P = 0.155). The implantation procedural time for a dual-chamber pacemaker was 88.3 ± 19.6 minutes and 67.3 ± 7.6 minutes in the zero-fluoroscopy and fluoroscopy groups (P = 0.013), respectively. No complications were observed during the procedure and the follow-up in the two groups, and all pacemakers worked with satisfactory parameters.
CONCLUSION: Ensite NavX system can be used as a reliable and safe zero-fluoroscopy approach for the implantation of single- or dual-chamber permanent pacemakers in specific patients, such as pregnant women or in extreme situations when the x-ray machine is not available.
METHODS AND RESULTS: From January 2012 to June 2016, six patients (50 ± 15 years, four of six were female, one of who was at the 25th week of gestation) who underwent permanent pacemaker implantation were included (zero-fluoroscopy group). Data from 20 consecutive cases of implantation performed under fluoroscopy guidance were chosen as a control group (fluoroscopy group). Total implantation procedure time for single-chamber pacemaker was 51.3 ± 13.1 minutes in the zero-fluoroscopy group and 42.6 ± 7.4 minutes in the fluoroscopy group (P = 0.155). The implantation procedural time for a dual-chamber pacemaker was 88.3 ± 19.6 minutes and 67.3 ± 7.6 minutes in the zero-fluoroscopy and fluoroscopy groups (P = 0.013), respectively. No complications were observed during the procedure and the follow-up in the two groups, and all pacemakers worked with satisfactory parameters.
CONCLUSION: Ensite NavX system can be used as a reliable and safe zero-fluoroscopy approach for the implantation of single- or dual-chamber permanent pacemakers in specific patients, such as pregnant women or in extreme situations when the x-ray machine is not available.