Implantable defibrillator

植入式除颤器
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Case Reports
    长QT综合征(LQTS)是一种常染色体显性遗传性心脏病,其特征是QT间期延长和猝死风险。该综合征有17种亚型与11种基因的遗传变异有关。第二常见的是2型,由KCNH2基因突变引起,它是钾通道的一部分,影响心室动作电位的最终复极化。该病例报告介绍了一名厄瓜多尔青少年患有先天性长QT综合征2型(OMIMID:613688),来自没有心脏病或心源性猝死背景的家庭。
    一个14岁的晕厥女孩,正常的超声心动图,不规则的心电图诊断为LQTS。此外,通过执行下一代测序,与LQTS2型相关的KCNH2基因p.(Ala614Val)(ClinVarID:VCV000029777.14)的致病变异,以及AKAP9p.(Arg1654GlyfsTer23)(rs779447911)中两个不确定意义的变异,和TTNp.(Arg34653Cys)(ClinVarID:VCV001475968.4)基因被鉴定。此外,血统分析表明,主要是美洲原住民的比例。
    根据基因组结果,患者被确定为具有高风险特征,植入式心律转复除颤器被选为最佳治疗选择,强调包括临床和基因组学方面的整体诊断的重要性。
    UNASSIGNED: Long QT syndrome (LQTS) is an autosomal dominant inherited cardiac condition characterized by a QT interval prolongation and risk of sudden death. There are 17 subtypes of this syndrome associated with genetic variants in 11 genes. The second most common is type 2, caused by a mutation in the KCNH2 gene, which is part of the potassium channel and influences the final repolarization of the ventricular action potential. This case report presents an Ecuadorian teen with congenital Long QT Syndrome type 2 (OMIM ID: 613688), from a family without cardiac diseases or sudden cardiac death backgrounds.
    UNASSIGNED: A 14-year-old girl with syncope, normal echocardiogram, and an irregular electrocardiogram was diagnosed with LQTS. Moreover, by performing Next-Generation Sequencing, a pathogenic variant in the KCNH2 gene p.(Ala614Val) (ClinVar ID: VCV000029777.14) associated with LQTS type 2, and two variants of uncertain significance in the AKAP9 p.(Arg1654GlyfsTer23) (rs779447911), and TTN p. (Arg34653Cys) (ClinVar ID: VCV001475968.4) genes were identified. Furthermore, ancestry analysis showed a mainly Native American proportion.
    UNASSIGNED: Based on the genomic results, the patient was identified to have a high-risk profile, and an implantable cardioverter defibrillator was selected as the best treatment option, highlighting the importance of including both the clinical and genomics aspects for an integral diagnosis.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Case Reports
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    设备接受度是识别植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)患者面临社会心理困扰和不良生活质量结局的关键因素。这项研究的目的是检查ICD患者样本中佛罗里达患者接受调查(FPAS)的内部结构(构造)和可靠性的有效性的证据,比较完整版本(FPAS-18项目)和缩写版本(FPAS-12项目)的心理测量指标。样本包括151名参与者(97名男性,平均年龄为55.7±14.1岁),他完成了针对巴西背景的FPAS工具的跨文化改编版本。通过两种不同的方法评估了两种版本的FPAS仪器的心理测量特性:•探索性和验证性因子分析:用于测试仪器的内部结构•Cronbach的Alpha和McDonald的Omega:用于确定仪器的可靠性FPAS-Br仪器的两个版本显示出内部结构有效性和可靠性的一致证据。然而,FPAS-Br12项目显示出更好的心理测量调整,通过对模型质量指标的分析证实。
    Device acceptance is a crucial factor in identifying implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) patients at risk for psychosocial distress and unfavorable quality of life outcomes. The purpose of this study was to examine the evidence of the validity of internal structure (construct) and reliability of the Florida Patient Acceptance Survey (FPAS) in a sample of ICD patients, comparing the psychometric indicators of the complete (FPAS-18 item) and abbreviated (FPAS-12 item) versions. The sample included 151 participants (97 males, mean age of 55.7 ± 14.1 years) who completed the cross-culturally adapted version of the FPAS instrument for the Brazilian context. The psychometric properties of both versions of the FPAS instrument were evaluated by two distinct approaches:•Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: used to test the internal structure of the instrument•Cronbach\'s Alpha and McDonald\'s Omega: used to determine the reliability of the instrument The two versions of the FPAS-Br instrument showed consistent evidence of internal structure validity and reliability. However, the FPAS-Br 12-item showed a better psychometric adjustment, confirmed by the analysis of the quality indicators of the models.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:传统上涉及长期住院时间(LOS)的电生理(EP)手术现在作为日常病例程序进行。冠状病毒病(COVID)-19大流行推动了许多中心缩短EP程序的LOS。这项调查探讨了现代选修EP程序的LOS。
    结果:来自35个国家的245名受访者完成了一项由27个多项选择题组成的在线调查。关于新心脏可植入电子设备(CIED)的植入,79.5%的植入式环路记录仪报告了每日病例程序,13.3%的PM,植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)的10.4%和CRT设备的10.2%。关于TOCIED发电机更换,报告了61.7%的PM的日间病例程序,49.2%的ICD和48.2%的CRT设备。关于消融,据报道,5.7%的房颤(AF)消融的日间病例手术,左侧消融为10.7%,右侧消融为17.5%。据报道,47.7%的PM植入的LOS≥2天,54.5%的ICD和56.9%的CRT设备;54.5%的AF消融,右侧消融的42.2%和左侧消融的46.1%。据报道,报销(43-56%)和床位可用性(20-47%)对选修程序的组织没有一致的影响。
    结论:选择性EP程序的LOS差异很大。某些程序的LOS似乎与其复杂性不成比例。报销或床位可用性均未持续影响LOS。
    Electrophysiological (EP) operations that have traditionally involved long hospital lengths of stay (LOS) are now being undertaken as day case procedures. The coronavirus disease-19 pandemic served as an impetus for many centres to shorten LOS for EP procedures. This survey explores LOS for elective EP procedures in the modern era.
    An online survey consisting of 27 multiple-choice questions was completed by 245 respondents from 35 countries. With respect to de novo cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantations, day case procedures were reported for 79.5% of implantable loop recorders, 13.3% of pacemakers (PMs), 10.4% of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and 10.2% of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. With respect to CIED generator replacements, day case procedures were reported for 61.7% of PMs, 49.2% of ICDs, and 48.2% of CRT devices. With regard to ablations, day case procedures were reported for 5.7% of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablations, 10.7% of left-sided ablations, and 17.5% of right-sided ablations. A LOS ≥ 2 days for CIED implantation was reported for 47.7% of PM, 54.5% of ICDs, and 56.9% of CRT devices and for 54.5% of AF ablations, 42.2% of right-sided ablations, and 46.1% of left-sided ablations. Reimbursement (43-56%) and bed availability (20-47%) were reported to have no consistent impact on the organization of elective procedures.
    There is a wide variation in the LOS for elective EP procedures. The LOS for some procedures appears disproportionate to their complexity. Neither reimbursement nor bed availability consistently influenced LOS.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Multicenter Study
    背景:患有心肌病和心道病的患者通常较年轻,预后主要与心律失常相关;由于植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)提供了防止心源性猝死的保护,他们的预期寿命几乎正常。皮下ICD(S-ICD)是经静脉ICD的有效替代方法,多年来一直在进化。
    目的:为了评估不适当电击(IS)的发生率,接受现代S-ICD植入的心肌病和通道病变患者的适当治疗和器械相关并发症.
    方法:我们招募了2016年1月至2020年12月期间接受现代S-ICD植入的心肌病和通道病患者,随访至2022年12月。
    结果:在观察期内共进行了1338例S-ICD植入。在这些病人中,628患有心肌病或信道病。12个月时,心肌病患者的IS率为4.6%(95CI:2.8-6.9),通道病变患者为1.1%(95CI:0.1-3.8)(P=0.032)。在43个月的中位随访中没有发现显着差异(HR:0.76;95CI:0.45-1.31;P=0.351)。在12个月时,心肌病患者的适当电击率为2.3%(95CI:1.1-4.1),在通道病患者中为2.1%(95CI:0.6-5.3)(P=1.0)。器械相关并发症发生率分别为0.9%(95CI:0.3-2.3)和3.2%(95CI:1.2-6.8),分别为(P=0.074)。在整个随访中没有发现显著差异。对起搏的需求很低,发生在0.7%的患者中。
    结论:现代S-ICD可能是心肌病和信道病变患者经静脉ICD的一种有价值的替代方法。我们的发现表明,现代S-ICD疗法的IS率较低。
    Patients with cardiomyopathies and channelopathies are usually younger and have a predominantly arrhythmia-related prognosis; they have nearly normal life expectancy thanks to the protection against sudden cardiac death provided by the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is an effective alternative to the transvenous ICD and has evolved over the years. This study aimed to evaluate the rate of inappropriate shocks (IS), appropriate therapies, and device-related complications in patients with cardiomyopathies and channelopathies who underwent modern S-ICD implantation.
    We enrolled consecutive patients with cardiomyopathies and channelopathies who had undergone implantation of a modern S-ICD from January 2016 to December 2020 and who were followed up until December 2022. A total of 1338 S-ICD implantations were performed within the observation period. Of these patients, 628 had cardiomyopathies or channelopathies. The rate of IS at 12 months was 4.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.8-6.9] in patients with cardiomyopathies and 1.1% (95% CI: 0.1-3.8) in patients with channelopathies (P = 0.032). No significant differences were noted over a median follow-up of 43 months [hazard ratio (HR): 0.76; 95% CI: 0.45-1.31; P = 0.351]. The rate of appropriate shocks at 12 months was 2.3% (95% CI: 1.1-4.1) in patients with cardiomyopathies and 2.1% (95% CI: 0.6-5.3) in patients with channelopathies (P = 1.0). The rate of device-related complications was 0.9% (95% CI: 0.3-2.3) and 3.2% (95% CI: 1.2-6.8), respectively (P = 0.074). No significant differences were noted over the entire follow-up. The need for pacing was low, occurring in 0.8% of patients.
    Modern S-ICDs may be a valuable alternative to transvenous ICDs in patients with cardiomyopathies and channelopathies. Our findings suggest that modern S-ICD therapy carries a low rate of IS.
    URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/Identifier: NCT02275637.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:经皮神经电刺激(TENS)是一种公认的缓解疼痛的方法。但是TENS电流也是电磁干扰(EMI)的来源。因此,TENS被认为是植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)患者的禁忌。然而,由于ICD和心脏再同步治疗(CRT)滤波和噪声保护算法技术的相当大的进步,数据可能已经过时.这项初步安全性研究的目的是重新评估现代ICD患者TENS的安全性。
    结果:来自4家制造商的配备55种不同型号的ICD/CRT除颤器的107名患者接受了标准化测试方案,包括颈椎和胸部的TENS,在两种刺激模式下-高频TENS(80Hz)和突发模式TENS(2Hz)。潜在干扰监测包括连续记录心电图导联II,心内电描记图和标记通道.107例患者中有17例(15.9%)检测到电磁干扰。最常见的是:15例患者(14%)被解释为室性早搏(VS/S),5例(4.6%)的噪声恢复,导致3例(2.8%)的临时异步起搏,解释为室性心动过速/室颤2例(1.9%),2例(1.9%)患者房性早搏。电磁干扰的发生受位置(胸部,P<0.01),较高的电流强度(P<0.01),和制造商(P=0.012)。
    结论:总体而言,仅检测到间歇性和轻微EMI.在ICD患者使用TENS之前,他们应该在心脏设备专家的监督下接受测试。
    Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is an established method for pain relief. But electrical TENS currents are also a source of electromagnetic interference (EMI). Thus, TENS is considered to be contraindicated in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients. However, data might be outdated due to considerable advances in ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) filtering and noise protection algorithm technologies. The aim of this pilot safety study was to re-evaluate the safety of TENS in patients with modern ICDs.
    One hundred and seven patients equipped with 55 different models of ICD/CRT with defibrillators from 4 manufacturers underwent a standardized test protocol including TENS at the cervical spine and the thorax, at 2 stimulation modes-high-frequency TENS (80 Hz) and burst-mode TENS (2 Hz). Potential interference monitoring included continuous documentation of ECG Lead II, intracardiac electrograms and the marker channel. Electromagnetic interference was detected in 17 of 107 patients (15.9%). Most frequent were: interpretations as a premature ventricular beats (VS/S) in 15 patients (14%), noise reversion in 5 (4.6%) which resulted in temporary asynchronous pacing in 3 (2.8%), interpretation as ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation in 2 (1.9%), and premature atrial beat in 2 (1.9%) patients. Electromagnetic interference occurrence was influenced by position (chest, P < 0.01), higher current intensity (P < 0.01), and manufacturer (P = 0.012).
    Overall, only intermittent and minor EMI were detected. Prior to the use of TENS in patients with ICDs, they should undergo testing under the supervision of a cardiac device specialist.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    心脏装置相关的感染性心内膜炎(CDRIE)是心脏装置(CD)植入的严重并发症,通常通过抗生素治疗和经皮摘除装置来治疗。很少有研究报道CDRIE在现实生活中的管理和预后。特别是,在临床实践中,装置的拔除率以及左心感染性心内膜炎(LHIE)和明显未感染的CD(LHIE+CDRIE-)患者的治疗没有得到很好的描述.
    我们试图在欧洲-恩多学习,的特点,预后,并对欧洲心脏病学会欧洲观察研究计划EURO-ENDO注册中纳入的483例CD患者进行管理。比较了三个人群:280个孤立的CDRIE(66.7±14.3年),157例LHIE和明显未感染的CD患者(LHIECDRIE-)(71.1±13.6),46例同时患有LHIE和CDRIE(LHIECDRIE)(70.2±10.1)。超声心动图并不总是经食管回波描记术(TOE);88.4%的孤立CDRIE是经胸回波描记术(TTE)(TOE=67.6%),对于LHIE+CDRIE-TTE=93.0%(TOE=58.6%),CDRIE+LHIE+TTE=87.0%(TOE=63.0%)。135例患者进行了核成像(阳性75.6%)。孤立CDRIE的住院死亡率较低,为13.2%。LHIE+CDRIE-和LHIE+CDRIE+分别为22.3%和30.4%(P=0004)。62.1%的CDRIE患者进行了设备提取,10.2%的LHIE+CDRIE-患者,CDRIE+LHIE+患者占45.7%。器械拔除与更好的预后相关[风险比0.59(0.40-0.87),P=0.0068]均匀在LHIE+CDRIE-组中(P=0.047)。
    心内膜炎患者的预后仍然很差,特别是在有相关LHIE的情况下。尽管准则建议,设备提取并不总是执行。移除装置与更好的预后相关,甚至在LHIE+CDRIE-组中。
    UNASSIGNED: Cardiac device-related infective endocarditis (CDRIE) is a severe complication of cardiac device (CD) implantation and is usually treated by antibiotic therapy and percutaneous device extraction. Few studies report the management and prognosis of CDRIE in real life. In particular, the rate of device extraction in clinical practice and the management of patients with left heart infective endocarditis (LHIE) and an apparently non-infected CD (LHIE+CDRIE-) are not well described.
    UNASSIGNED: We sought to study in EURO-ENDO, the characteristics, prognosis, and management of 483 patients with a CD included in the European Society of Cardiology EurObservational Research Programme EURO-ENDO registry. Three populations were compared: 280 isolated CDRIE (66.7 ± 14.3 years), 157 patients with LHIE and an apparently non-infected CD (LHIE+CDRIE-) (71.1 ± 13.6), and 46 patients with both LHIE and CDRIE (LHIE+CDRIE+) (70.2 ± 10.1). Echocardiography was not always transoesophageal echography (TOE); it was transthoracic echography (TTE) for isolated CDRIE in 88.4% (TOE = 67.6%), for LHIE+CDRIE- TTE = 93.0% (TOE = 58.6%), and for CDRIE+LHIE+ TTE = 87.0% (TOE = 63.0%). Nuclear imaging was performed in 135 patients (positive for 75.6%). In-hospital mortality was lower in isolated CDRIE 13.2% vs. 22.3% and 30.4% for LHIE+CDRIE- and LHIE+CDRIE+ (P = 0004). Device extraction was performed in 62.1% patients with isolated CDRIE, 10.2% of LHIE+CDRIE- patients, and 45.7% of CDRIE+LHIE+ patients. Device extraction was associated with a better prognosis [hazard ratio 0.59 (0.40-0.87), P = 0.0068] even in the LHIE+CDRIE- group (P = 0.047).
    UNASSIGNED: Prognosis of endocarditis in patients with a CD remains poor, particularly in the presence of an associated LHIE. Although recommended by guidelines, device extraction is not always performed. Device removal was associated with better prognosis, even in the LHIE+CDRIE- group.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Clinical Study
    目的:皮下植入型心律转复除颤器(S-ICD)治疗迅速发展。然而,关于S-ICD提取程序和后续患者管理的数据很少.这项分析的目的是描述程序,管理,以及临床实践中S-ICD提取的结果。
    结果:我们在66个意大利中心连续招募需要完全S-ICD摘除的患者。从2013年到2022年,纳入了2718例接受S-ICD从头植入的患者。其中,71需要完整的S-ICD系统提取(17由于感染)。所有患者均成功提取了S-ICD系统,未报告并发症;中位手术时间为40(第25-75百分位数:20-55)min.简单的手动牵引足以移除59名(84%)患者的导线,其中铅停留时间较短[20(9-32)个月vs.30(22-41)个月;P=0.032]。在非感染性[2(1-2)天]和感染性指征[3(1-6)天]的情况下,住院时间较短。在感染的情况下,没有患者需要拔牙后静脉注射抗生素,任何抗生素治疗的中位持续时间为10(10-14)天,29%的病例在同一手术中进行了重新植入。中位时间为21个月,未出现并发症。
    结论:S-ICD提取是安全且易于进行的,没有并发症。在大多数患者中,导线的简单牵引是成功的,但是植入系统的时间可能需要特定的工具。S-ICD提取的围手术期和术后管理没有并发症,并且对患者和医疗保健系统没有负担。
    背景:URL:http://clinicaltrials.gov/Identifier:NCT02275637。
    Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) therapy is expanding rapidly. However, there are few data on the S-ICD extraction procedure and subsequent patient management. The aim of this analysis was to describe the procedure, management, and outcome of S-ICD extractions in clinical practice.
    We enrolled consecutive patients who required complete S-ICD extraction at 66 Italian centres. From 2013 to 2022, 2718 patients undergoing de novo implantation of an S-ICD were enrolled. Of these, 71 required complete S-ICD system extraction (17 owing to infection). The S-ICD system was successfully extracted in all patients, and no complications were reported; the median procedure duration was 40 (25th-75th percentile: 20-55) min. Simple manual traction was sufficient to remove the lead in 59 (84%) patients, in whom lead-dwelling time was shorter [20 (9-32) months vs. 30 (22-41) months; P = 0.032]. Hospitalization time was short in the case of both non-infectious [2 (1-2) days] and infectious indications [3 (1-6) days]. In the case of infection, no patients required post-extraction intravenous antibiotics, the median duration of any antibiotic therapy was 10 (10-14) days, and the re-implantation was performed during the same procedure in 29% of cases. No complications arose over a median of 21 months.
    The S-ICD extraction was safe and easy to perform, with no complications. Simple traction of the lead was successful in most patients, but specific tools could be needed for systems implanted for a longer time. The peri- and post-procedural management of S-ICD extraction was free from complications and not burdensome for patients and healthcare system.
    URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/Identifier: NCT02275637.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:在皮下植入式心律转复除颤器(S-ICD)患者中,UNTOUCHED研究表明,在对200~250bpm的条件区和心律失常>250bpm的电击区进行编程时,不适当电击率非常低.在临床实践中采用这种编程方法的程度仍然未知。它对不适当和适当疗法的比率的影响也是如此。
    结果:我们评估了56个意大利中心的1468名连续S-ICD受者的植入和随访期间的ICD编程。我们还测量了随访期间不适当和适当电击的发生。在植入时,计划条件区截止值的中位数设定为200bpm(IQR:200-220),休克区截止值设定为230bpm(IQR:210-250).随访期间,条件区截止率没有显著变化,而622例(42%)患者的休克区截止值发生了变化,中位值增加至250bpm(IQR:230-250)(P<0.001)。426名(29%)患者在植入器械后立即采用UnTOUCHED-likeprogrammingofdetectioncut-off,在714(49%,最后一次随访时P<0.001)。UnTOUCHED-likeprogrammingwasindependentlyassociatedwithlessimpossibleshakes(riskratio0.50,95CI0.25-0.98,P=0.044),对适当和无效的电击没有影响。
    结论:近年来,S-ICD植入中心越来越多地编程高心律失常检测截止率,在植入新的S-ICD接受者的情况下,以及在先前存在的植入物的情况下的随访期间。这大大有助于减少临床实践中不适当电击的发生率。Rordorf:S-ICD的编程。
    背景:URL:http://clinicaltrials.gov/Identifier:NCT02275637。
    In subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) recipients, the UNTOUCHED study demonstrated a very low inappropriate shock rate on programming a conditional zone between 200 and 250 bpm and a shock zone for arrhythmias >250 bpm. The extent to which this programming approach is adopted in clinical practice is still unknown, as is its impact on the rates of inappropriate and appropriate therapies.
    We assessed ICD programming on implantation and during follow-up in a cohort of 1468 consecutive S-ICD recipients in 56 Italian centres. We also measured the occurrence of inappropriate and appropriate shocks during follow-up. On implantation, the median programmed conditional zone cut-off was set to 200 bpm (IQR: 200-220) and the shock zone cut-off was 230 bpm (IQR: 210-250). During follow-up, the conditional zone cut-off rate was not significantly changed, while the shock zone cut-off was changed in 622 (42%) patients and the median value increased to 250 bpm (IQR: 230-250) (P < 0.001). UNTOUCHED-like programming of detection cut-offs was adopted in 426 (29%) patients immediately after device implantation, and in 714 (49%, P < 0.001) at the last follow-up. UNTOUCHED-like programming was independently associated with fewer inappropriate shocks (hazard ratio 0.50, 95%CI 0.25-0.98, P = 0.044), and had no impact on appropriate and ineffective shocks.
    In recent years, S-ICD implanting centres have increasingly programmed high arrhythmia detection cut-off rates, at the time of implantation in the case of new S-ICD recipients, and during follow-up in the case of pre-existing implants. This has contributed significantly to reducing the incidence of inappropriate shocks in clinical practice. Rordorf: Programming of the S-ICD.
    URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/Identifier: NCT02275637.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号