中国循环杂志
中國循環雜誌
중국순배잡지
CHINESE CIRCULATION JOURNAL
2015年
2期
123-126
,共4页
侯翠红%郝素芳%程怀兵%浦介麟%任晓庆%陈柯萍%华伟%张澍
侯翠紅%郝素芳%程懷兵%浦介麟%任曉慶%陳柯萍%華偉%張澍
후취홍%학소방%정부병%포개린%임효경%진가평%화위%장주
肥厚型心肌病%高危因素%埋藏式心律转复除颤器
肥厚型心肌病%高危因素%埋藏式心律轉複除顫器
비후형심기병%고위인소%매장식심률전복제전기
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy%High risk factor%Implantable cardiac defibrillator
目的:观察肥厚型心肌病(HCM)高危患者植入埋藏式心律转复除颤器(ICD)的疗效。
<br> 方法:系统收集我院2004-01至2013-10期间31例植入ICD的HCM患者的临床资料并进行随访,随访包括门诊复诊、ICD程控及电话随访。根据ICD有无正确识别及治疗,分析放电的相关性。
<br> 结果:31例患者平均年龄(54.9±15.0)岁,病史年限(13.5±11.5)年,植入ICD前出现晕厥或晕前反应26例,经电复律或药物复律22例,心肺复苏生存者3例。有HCM家族史7例,其中一级亲属猝死3例。31例患者最大左心室壁厚度(21.0±5.2)mm,5例有左心室流出道压差现象。ICD一级预防5例,二级预防26例。31例患者平均随访时间(37.9±29.0)个月,随访期间41.9%(13/31)患者在植入ICD后平均2年(0.5年~5年)发生ICD正确治疗事件。ICD正确识别共放电63次,平均2.1次/人,5例发生超速起搏抑制治疗共64次,平均2.0次/人,发生放电事件均为二级预防患者。6.7%患者出现并发症,包括电极移位调整1例,电极感知故障1例。与无放电患者比较,有放电患者的年龄更小、左心室流出道压差及心室颤动发生率更高,复律率更高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。有放电患者及无放电患者中服用β受体阻滞剂和非二氢吡啶钙拮抗剂的患者比例差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。有放电患者中安装单腔ICD与安装双腔ICD的患者比例差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)
<br> 结论:年轻、既往有晕厥或心室颤动史的HCM患者在服用β受体阻滞剂同时更能从ICD植入中获益。
目的:觀察肥厚型心肌病(HCM)高危患者植入埋藏式心律轉複除顫器(ICD)的療效。
<br> 方法:繫統收集我院2004-01至2013-10期間31例植入ICD的HCM患者的臨床資料併進行隨訪,隨訪包括門診複診、ICD程控及電話隨訪。根據ICD有無正確識彆及治療,分析放電的相關性。
<br> 結果:31例患者平均年齡(54.9±15.0)歲,病史年限(13.5±11.5)年,植入ICD前齣現暈厥或暈前反應26例,經電複律或藥物複律22例,心肺複囌生存者3例。有HCM傢族史7例,其中一級親屬猝死3例。31例患者最大左心室壁厚度(21.0±5.2)mm,5例有左心室流齣道壓差現象。ICD一級預防5例,二級預防26例。31例患者平均隨訪時間(37.9±29.0)箇月,隨訪期間41.9%(13/31)患者在植入ICD後平均2年(0.5年~5年)髮生ICD正確治療事件。ICD正確識彆共放電63次,平均2.1次/人,5例髮生超速起搏抑製治療共64次,平均2.0次/人,髮生放電事件均為二級預防患者。6.7%患者齣現併髮癥,包括電極移位調整1例,電極感知故障1例。與無放電患者比較,有放電患者的年齡更小、左心室流齣道壓差及心室顫動髮生率更高,複律率更高,差異有統計學意義(P<0.05)。有放電患者及無放電患者中服用β受體阻滯劑和非二氫吡啶鈣拮抗劑的患者比例差異無統計學意義(P>0.05)。有放電患者中安裝單腔ICD與安裝雙腔ICD的患者比例差異無統計學意義(P>0.05)
<br> 結論:年輕、既往有暈厥或心室顫動史的HCM患者在服用β受體阻滯劑同時更能從ICD植入中穫益。
목적:관찰비후형심기병(HCM)고위환자식입매장식심률전복제전기(ICD)적료효。
<br> 방법:계통수집아원2004-01지2013-10기간31례식입ICD적HCM환자적림상자료병진행수방,수방포괄문진복진、ICD정공급전화수방。근거ICD유무정학식별급치료,분석방전적상관성。
<br> 결과:31례환자평균년령(54.9±15.0)세,병사년한(13.5±11.5)년,식입ICD전출현훈궐혹훈전반응26례,경전복률혹약물복률22례,심폐복소생존자3례。유HCM가족사7례,기중일급친속졸사3례。31례환자최대좌심실벽후도(21.0±5.2)mm,5례유좌심실류출도압차현상。ICD일급예방5례,이급예방26례。31례환자평균수방시간(37.9±29.0)개월,수방기간41.9%(13/31)환자재식입ICD후평균2년(0.5년~5년)발생ICD정학치료사건。ICD정학식별공방전63차,평균2.1차/인,5례발생초속기박억제치료공64차,평균2.0차/인,발생방전사건균위이급예방환자。6.7%환자출현병발증,포괄전겁이위조정1례,전겁감지고장1례。여무방전환자비교,유방전환자적년령경소、좌심실류출도압차급심실전동발생솔경고,복률솔경고,차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)。유방전환자급무방전환자중복용β수체조체제화비이경필정개길항제적환자비례차이무통계학의의(P>0.05)。유방전환자중안장단강ICD여안장쌍강ICD적환자비례차이무통계학의의(P>0.05)
<br> 결론:년경、기왕유훈궐혹심실전동사적HCM환자재복용β수체조체제동시경능종ICD식입중획익。
Objective: To observe the efficacy of implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) in the high-risk patients of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM).
<br> Methods: A total of 31 HCM patients with ICD implantation in our hospital from 2004-01 to 2013-10 were enrolled. The follow-up study included the hospital records, clinical visit and telephonic interview. Based on identification and treatment, the relevant ICD shocks were analyzed.
<br> Results: The patients’ mean age was at (54.9 ± 15) years and the history of disease was at (13.5 ± 11.5) years. There were 26 cases suffered from syncope or pre-syncope before ICD implantation and 22 cases had the cardio-version by electrical treatment or medication including 3 survivors from cardiac arrest. There were 7 patients with family history of HCM, 3 had sudden cardiac death in their first-degree relatives. The maximum left veutricalar wall thickness of 31 patients was at (21.0 ± 5.2) mm and 5 with left ventricular outflow obstruction. There were 5 patients received ICD implantation for primary prevention and 26 for secondary prevention. The average follow-
<br> up time was (37.9 ± 29.0) months, and 41.9% (13/31) of patients had ICD correct treatment at the mean of 2 (0.5-5) years after ICD implantation. In patients with secondary prevention, ICD conducted 63 shocks with correct identification at the mean of 2.1 shocks/person, and 64 episodes of anti-tachycardia pacing recorded in 5 patients at the mean of 2.0 episodes/person. There were 6.7% of patients with complications including 1 of electrode displacement and 1 of electrode sensing fault. The patients with ICD discharge had the younger age, higher incidences of left ventricular outflow obstruction, ventricular fibrillation and higher rate of cardio-version than those without ICD discharge, P<0.05. The patients usingβ-blocker and nondihydropridine calcium channel blolcker were similar for discharge or no discharge, P>0.05.
<br> Conclusion: HCM patients with the younger age, history of syncope or ventricular fibrillation and usingβ-blocker would be more beneficial for ICD implantation.