File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Effect of left ventricular function on long-term left ventricular pacing and sensing threshold

TitleEffect of left ventricular function on long-term left ventricular pacing and sensing threshold
Authors
Issue Date2003
PublisherSpringer New York LLC. The Journal's web site is located at http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=journal&issn=1383-875X
Citation
Journal Of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology, 2003, v. 9 n. 1, p. 21-24 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: The effect of left ventricular (LV) systolic function on the long-term left ventricular pacing and sensing threshold is unclear. Methods and Results: We studied the effect of LV ejection fraction (LVEF) on the LV pacing and sensing threshold in 56 patients (mean age: 70.2 ± 10.5 years) underwent permanent LV pacing using a self-retaining coronary sinus lead (Model 1055 K, St Jude Medical, USA). In 49 patients, the LV lead was implanted for conventional pacemaker indication (sick sinus syndrome = 14, heart block = 26 or slow atrial fibrillation = 9). The remaining 7 patients were implanted for congestive heart failure. The LV pacing and sensing threshold, and lead impedance were compared between patients with LVEF <40% (Group 1, n = 28) and LVEF >40% (Group 2, n = 28) during implant and at 3-month follow up. The LV pacing lead was successfully implanted in all patients without any lead dislodgement on follow-up. At implant, Group 1 patients had a significant lower R wave amplitude, but similar LV pacing threshold and lead impedance as compared to Group 2. However, at 3-month follow-up, Group 1 patients had a significantly higher LV pacing threshold compared to Group 2 patients. There were no significant differences in the sensing threshold and lead impedance between the two groups. Furthermore, there was also a significant interval increase in LV pacing threshold in Group 1 patients (0.94 ± 0.12 V) after 3 months, but not in Group 2 patients (0.16 ± 0.08 V, p < 0.01). Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that the LV systolic function has a significant impact on the long-term LV pacing threshold. The long-term left ventricular pacing threshold in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction increased after implant and was higher than patients with normal left ventricular systolic function.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/162717
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.676
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.930
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTse, HFen_US
dc.contributor.authorYu, Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorPaul, VEen_US
dc.contributor.authorBoriani, Gen_US
dc.contributor.authorSchuchert, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorDel Ojo, JLen_US
dc.contributor.authorMalinowski, Ken_US
dc.contributor.authorBlanc, JJen_US
dc.contributor.authorLau, CPen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-09-05T05:22:45Z-
dc.date.available2012-09-05T05:22:45Z-
dc.date.issued2003en_US
dc.identifier.citationJournal Of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology, 2003, v. 9 n. 1, p. 21-24en_US
dc.identifier.issn1383-875Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/162717-
dc.description.abstractBackground: The effect of left ventricular (LV) systolic function on the long-term left ventricular pacing and sensing threshold is unclear. Methods and Results: We studied the effect of LV ejection fraction (LVEF) on the LV pacing and sensing threshold in 56 patients (mean age: 70.2 ± 10.5 years) underwent permanent LV pacing using a self-retaining coronary sinus lead (Model 1055 K, St Jude Medical, USA). In 49 patients, the LV lead was implanted for conventional pacemaker indication (sick sinus syndrome = 14, heart block = 26 or slow atrial fibrillation = 9). The remaining 7 patients were implanted for congestive heart failure. The LV pacing and sensing threshold, and lead impedance were compared between patients with LVEF <40% (Group 1, n = 28) and LVEF >40% (Group 2, n = 28) during implant and at 3-month follow up. The LV pacing lead was successfully implanted in all patients without any lead dislodgement on follow-up. At implant, Group 1 patients had a significant lower R wave amplitude, but similar LV pacing threshold and lead impedance as compared to Group 2. However, at 3-month follow-up, Group 1 patients had a significantly higher LV pacing threshold compared to Group 2 patients. There were no significant differences in the sensing threshold and lead impedance between the two groups. Furthermore, there was also a significant interval increase in LV pacing threshold in Group 1 patients (0.94 ± 0.12 V) after 3 months, but not in Group 2 patients (0.16 ± 0.08 V, p < 0.01). Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that the LV systolic function has a significant impact on the long-term LV pacing threshold. The long-term left ventricular pacing threshold in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction increased after implant and was higher than patients with normal left ventricular systolic function.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSpringer New York LLC. The Journal's web site is located at http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=journal&issn=1383-875Xen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiologyen_US
dc.subject.meshAgeden_US
dc.subject.meshCardiac Pacing, Artificialen_US
dc.subject.meshElectric Impedanceen_US
dc.subject.meshHeart Block - Physiopathology - Therapyen_US
dc.subject.meshHeart Failure - Physiopathology - Therapyen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshSensory Thresholdsen_US
dc.subject.meshSick Sinus Syndrome - Physiopathology - Therapyen_US
dc.subject.meshStroke Volumeen_US
dc.subject.meshSystoleen_US
dc.subject.meshVentricular Dysfunction, Left - Physiopathology - Therapyen_US
dc.subject.meshVentricular Function, Leften_US
dc.titleEffect of left ventricular function on long-term left ventricular pacing and sensing thresholden_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailTse, HF:hftse@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityTse, HF=rp00428en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1023/A:1025312319011en_US
dc.identifier.pmid12975566-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0141427586en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0141427586&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume9en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.spage21en_US
dc.identifier.epage24en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000184844400003-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridTse, HF=7006070805en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridYu, C=7404978038en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridPaul, VE=7102371840en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBoriani, G=7007079613en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSchuchert, A=7007103218en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridDel Ojo, JL=6507432055en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridMalinowski, K=7006007692en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBlanc, JJ=23033371500en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLau, CP=7401968501en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats