Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Heart Rhythm ; 13(6): 1253-9, 2016 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26829114

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Medtronic model 4195 (StarFix) left ventricular lead is an active fixation lead that provides additional support within the coronary sinus (CS) via deployable lobes. While this lead has been shown to have excellent stability within the CS, concerns about its extractability have been raised. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of the extraction of the model 4195 lead vs other Medtronic CS leads in a prospective cohort study. METHODS: Patients undergoing extraction of this and other CS leads for standard indications were prospectively enrolled and studied. The primary outcomes of interest were the removal success rates and associated complication rates. Patients were followed for a month postprocedure. RESULTS: The overall left ventricular lead extraction success rate was 97.6% (n = 205). Among 40 patients with chronic model 4195 leads, there were 37 successful extractions (92.5%) as compared to 98.8% for the 165 non-4195 leads. However, in 2 of the 3 StarFix lead extraction failures, standard extraction techniques were not used. All 10 of the model 4195 leads that had been implanted for less than 6 months were extracted without incident. CONCLUSION: In this largest study of CS lead extractions published to date, the overall success rate of the extraction of chronically implanted CS leads is high and the complication rate is similar in these lead models. The extraction of the model 4195 lead is clearly more challenging, but it can be accomplished in high-volume extraction centers with experienced operators. It is recommended that the model 4195 lead be extracted by experienced operators.


Assuntos
Dispositivos de Terapia de Ressincronização Cardíaca/classificação , Remoção de Dispositivo , Complicações Intraoperatórias , Marca-Passo Artificial/classificação , Idoso , Estudos de Coortes , Seio Coronário/cirurgia , Remoção de Dispositivo/efeitos adversos , Remoção de Dispositivo/métodos , Desenho de Equipamento , Feminino , Humanos , Complicações Intraoperatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Intraoperatórias/etiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Avaliação de Processos e Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Estudos Prospectivos
2.
Heart Rhythm ; 3(10): 1140-7, 2006 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17018340

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Cardiac contractility modulation signals are associated with acutely improved hemodynamics, but chronic clinical impact is not defined. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this randomized, double-blind, pilot study was to determine the feasibility of safely and effectively delivering cardiac contractility modulation signals in patients with heart failure. METHODS: Forty-nine subjects with ejection fraction <35%, normal QRS duration (105 +/- 15 ms), and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III or IV heart failure despite medical therapy received a cardiac contractility modulation pulse generator. Patients were randomized to have their devices programmed to deliver cardiac contractility modulation signals (n = 25, treatment group) or to remain off (n = 24, control group) for 6 months. Evaluations included NYHA class, 6-minute walk, cardiopulmonary stress test, Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire, and Holter monitoring. RESULTS: Although most baseline features were balanced between groups, ejection fraction (31.4% +/- 7.4% vs 24.9% +/- 6.5%, P = .003), end-diastolic dimension (52.1 +/- 21.4 mm vs 62.5 +/- 6.2 mm, P = .01), peak VO(2) (16.0 +/- 2.9 mL O(2)/kg/min vs 14.3 +/- 2.8 mL O(2)/kg/min, P = .02), and anaerobic threshold (12.3 +/- 2.5 mL O(2)/kg/min vs 10.6 +/- 2.4 mL O(2)/kg/min, P = .01) were worse in the treatment group than in the control group. Nevertheless, one death occurred in the control group, and more patients in the treatment group were free of hospitalization for any cause at 6 months (84% vs 62%). No change in ectopy was observed. Compared with baseline, 6-minute walk (13.4 m), peak VO(2) (0.2 mL O(2)/kg/min), and anaerobic threshold (0.8 mL O(2)/kg/min) increased more in the treatment group than in control. None of these differences were statistically significant (small sample size). NYHA and Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire changed similarly in the two groups. CONCLUSION: Despite a sicker population in the treatment group, no specific safety concerns emerged with chronic cardiac contractility modulation signal administration. Further study is required to definitively define the safety and efficacy of cardiac contractility modulation signals.


Assuntos
Cardioversão Elétrica/métodos , Insuficiência Cardíaca/terapia , Contração Miocárdica/fisiologia , Idoso , Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Método Duplo-Cego , Eletrocardiografia Ambulatorial , Teste de Esforço , Tolerância ao Exercício/fisiologia , Estudos de Viabilidade , Feminino , Seguimentos , Insuficiência Cardíaca/fisiopatologia , Frequência Cardíaca/fisiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Projetos Piloto , Estudos Prospectivos , Volume Sistólico/fisiologia , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...