Mayo Clinic proceedings · 1998
Randomized prospective pilot study of long-term dual-site atrial pacing for prevention of atrial fibrillation.
Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка 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.
Friedman P A, Hill M R, Hammill S C, Hayes D L, Stanton M S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether dual-site atrial pacing is feasible, safe, and effective.
DESIGN: We undertook a randomized prospective single-blind crossover study.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Nine patients with at least two episodes per month of symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation participated in a randomized crossover study involving three separate 3-month blocks of single-site atrial pacing, dual-site atrial pacing, and control (support-only) pacing.
RESULTS: Dual-site atrial pacing resulted in shorter P wave duration (81 +/- 14 ms) than did single-site pacing (111 +/- 12 ms) or control sinus rhythm (123 +/- 9 ms) (P<0.0001) and in fewer premature atrial complexes on Holter monitoring (P = 0.06). The arrhythmia-free interval was longer with dual-site pacing (67 +/- 17 days) than with single-site (62 +/- 30 days) or support-only (49 +/- 34 days) pacing (P = 0.10). This pilot study was not statistically powered to detect a difference between pacing modes.
CONCLUSION: (1) Dual-site atrial pacing is feasible and safe; (2) it shortens the P wave duration and tends to decrease premature atrial complexes on Holter monitoring; (3) any atrial pacing tends to prolong the arrhythmia-free interval; and (4) this pilot study enrolled too few patients to determine whether a significant difference in pacing modes exists and supports the need for a larger study.
DESIGN: We undertook a randomized prospective single-blind crossover study.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Nine patients with at least two episodes per month of symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation participated in a randomized crossover study involving three separate 3-month blocks of single-site atrial pacing, dual-site atrial pacing, and control (support-only) pacing.
RESULTS: Dual-site atrial pacing resulted in shorter P wave duration (81 +/- 14 ms) than did single-site pacing (111 +/- 12 ms) or control sinus rhythm (123 +/- 9 ms) (P<0.0001) and in fewer premature atrial complexes on Holter monitoring (P = 0.06). The arrhythmia-free interval was longer with dual-site pacing (67 +/- 17 days) than with single-site (62 +/- 30 days) or support-only (49 +/- 34 days) pacing (P = 0.10). This pilot study was not statistically powered to detect a difference between pacing modes.
CONCLUSION: (1) Dual-site atrial pacing is feasible and safe; (2) it shortens the P wave duration and tends to decrease premature atrial complexes on Holter monitoring; (3) any atrial pacing tends to prolong the arrhythmia-free interval; and (4) this pilot study enrolled too few patients to determine whether a significant difference in pacing modes exists and supports the need for a larger study.