【摘要】 目的探讨阵发性房颤患者在房颤发作时植入心房电极的价值。方法 96例患者分为两组,84例窦性心律组和12例阵发性房颤组。两组均于窦性心律时或术中房颤发作时测试其右心房A波振幅。房颤组随访术后恢复窦性心律时的右心房A波振幅,并对窦性心律时和房颤发作时的右心房A波振幅进行对比分析。结果窦性心律组术中的右心房A波振幅为(2.6~9.5)m V(3.52±1.44)m V。阵发性房颤组术中房颤时右心房A波振幅为(1.3~3.1)m V(2.78±0.49)m V,两者差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。阵发性房颤组术后转复窦性心律即刻、术后3个月、术后6个月、术后1年测得的心房A波振幅分别为(1.8~4.5)m V(3.08±0.59)m V、(2.8~4.6)m V(3.19±0.49)m V、(2.7~4.8)m V(3.16±0.55)m V、(2.6~5.2)m V(3.13±0.69)m V,它们和房颤发作时测得的心房A波振幅差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。术后窦性心律时心房感知功能及起搏功能均良好。结论阵发性房颤发作时植入右房电极是可行的,右房A波振幅可作为植入的感知参数。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To discuss the efficacy of atrial lead implantation during an attack of atrial fibrillation.Methods 96 patients were divided into two groups: 84 cases in sinus rhythm group and 12 cases in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation group. We measured the right atrium A wave amplitude of the two groups during sinus rhythm or atrial fibrillation. Right atrial A wave amplitude converting into sinus rhythm of atrial fibrillation group were followed up.Then we compared the right atrial A wave amplitude between sinus rhythm and atrial fibrillation. Results Right atrial A wave amplitude of sinus rhythm group was(2.6~9.5)m V(3.52±1.44)m V. The right atrial A wave amplitude during atrial fibrillation was(1.3~3.1)m V(2.78±0.49)m V. There was no statistical significance between the two group( p>0.05). During the follow- up, the right atrial A wave amplitude in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation group after right converted to sinus rhythm, 3 months later, 6 months later, 1 year later was respectively(1.8~4.5)m V(3.08±0.59)m V,(2.8 ~4.6)m V(3.19 ± 0.49)m V,(2.7 ~4.8)m V(3.16 ± 0.55) m V,(2.6 ~5.2)m V(3.13 ± 0.69)m V. There was no statistical relevance with the amplitude during atrial fibrillation( p>0.05). After the operation, the function of atrial sense and pace were good during sinus rhythm. Conclusions Right atrid lead implantation was feasible, and right atrial A wave amplitude was an applicable sensing parameter for pacemaker when an atrial fibrillation occurred.更多还原