Heart rhythm · 2014
Long-term atrial and ventricular epicardial pacemaker lead survival after cardiac operations in pediatric patients with congenital heart disease.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Lau Kelvin C, William Gaynor J, Fuller Stephanie M, Karen A Smoots, Shah Maully J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Multiple cardiac operations and resultant myocardial scarring have been implicated in the overall reduced performance of epicardial pacing systems in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD).
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to evaluate long-term permanent epicardial pacing lead survival in patients with CHD who had epicardial lead placement in association with surgical repair or palliation.
METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who had implantation of epicardial pacing systems between January 1984 and June 2010 was conducted. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) presence of CHD and (2) cardiac operation(s) concomitant with or before initial permanent epicardial lead implantation. Patients were divided into 2 anatomical groups: single ventricle (SV) and biventricle (Bi-V).
RESULTS: Epicardial leads were implanted in 663 patients during the study period. One hundred fifty-five patients (76 SV [49%] and 79 Bi-V [51%]) were included, resulting in 259 leads and 946 lead-years of follow-up. There were 2 deaths and 8 infections attributable to pacemaker placement. Overall atrial lead survival at 1, 2, 5, and 10 years (99%, 93%, 83%, and 72%) was comparable with ventricular lead survival (97%, 90%, 74%, and 60%) (P = .540) and was also similar between SV and Bi-V patients. Cox regression analysis demonstrated that SV palliation and an earlier era of lead implantation (1984-1999) was significantly associated with ventricular, but not atrial, lead malfunction.
CONCLUSION: Epicardial leads had acceptable longevity despite cardiac operations for complex CHD, suggesting the long-term reliability of this pacing method.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to evaluate long-term permanent epicardial pacing lead survival in patients with CHD who had epicardial lead placement in association with surgical repair or palliation.
METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who had implantation of epicardial pacing systems between January 1984 and June 2010 was conducted. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) presence of CHD and (2) cardiac operation(s) concomitant with or before initial permanent epicardial lead implantation. Patients were divided into 2 anatomical groups: single ventricle (SV) and biventricle (Bi-V).
RESULTS: Epicardial leads were implanted in 663 patients during the study period. One hundred fifty-five patients (76 SV [49%] and 79 Bi-V [51%]) were included, resulting in 259 leads and 946 lead-years of follow-up. There were 2 deaths and 8 infections attributable to pacemaker placement. Overall atrial lead survival at 1, 2, 5, and 10 years (99%, 93%, 83%, and 72%) was comparable with ventricular lead survival (97%, 90%, 74%, and 60%) (P = .540) and was also similar between SV and Bi-V patients. Cox regression analysis demonstrated that SV palliation and an earlier era of lead implantation (1984-1999) was significantly associated with ventricular, but not atrial, lead malfunction.
CONCLUSION: Epicardial leads had acceptable longevity despite cardiac operations for complex CHD, suggesting the long-term reliability of this pacing method.