Safety and Stability of Right Ventricular Septal Pacing Compared with Right Ventricular Apex Pacing in Our Hospital
-
- Nakamura Hiroaki
- Department of Cardiology, Hiratsuka Kyosai Hospital
-
- Kobayashi Isshi
- Department of Cardiology, Hiratsuka Kyosai Hospital
-
- Otani Hirofumi
- Department of Cardiology, Hiratsuka Kyosai Hospital
-
- Tachibana Keiko
- Department of Cardiology, Hiratsuka Kyosai Hospital
-
- Kujiraoka Ken
- Department of Cardiology, Hiratsuka Kyosai Hospital
-
- Muramoto Hirotaka
- Department of Cardiology, Hiratsuka Kyosai Hospital
-
- Onishi Takayuki
- Department of Cardiology, Hiratsuka Kyosai Hospital
-
- Nagata Yasutoshi
- Department of Cardiology, Hiratsuka Kyosai Hospital
-
- Onishi Yuko
- Department of Cardiology, Hiratsuka Kyosai Hospital
-
- Umezawa Shigeo
- Department of Cardiology, Hiratsuka Kyosai Hospital
-
- Niwa Akihiro
- Department of Cardiology, Hiratsuka Kyosai Hospital
-
- Isobe Mitsuaki
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University
この論文をさがす
抄録
Background: Right ventricular septal (RVS) pacing is an alternative to right ventricular apical (RVA) pacing, but long term lead safety and stability of RVS sometimes differ in each hospital. Methods and Results: A total of 32 patients undergoing single or dual-chamber pacemaker implantation were included in this study. The right ventricular lead was implanted on the septum in 12 patients and in the apex in 20. Ventricular amplitude, pacing threshold and lead impedance were measured twice a year after the implantation in both group, and were compared respectively. There were no major perioperative complications in both group. There was no significant difference of ventricular amplitude and lead impedance in both group, but pacing threshold of RVS group was significantly higher at six months after the implantation than at the postoperative period. Pacing threshold showed no significant difference between RVS group and RVA group at the postoperative period, but at six and 12 months after the implantation, that of RVS group was significantly higher than RVA group. Conclusion: RVS pacing is a safety available method compared with RVA pacing. Pacing threshold of RVS group tends to increase after the implantation, but stabilizes within a year.
収録刊行物
-
- Journal of Arrhythmia
-
Journal of Arrhythmia 27 (Supplement), PJ1_058-, 2011
日本不整脈学会
- Tweet
詳細情報 詳細情報について
-
- CRID
- 1390282680223707904
-
- NII論文ID
- 130002130568
-
- ISSN
- 18832148
- 18804276
-
- 本文言語コード
- en
-
- データソース種別
-
- JaLC
- Crossref
- CiNii Articles
-
- 抄録ライセンスフラグ
- 使用不可