JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Optimized multisite ventricular pacing in postoperative single-ventricle patients.

Ventricular dyssynchrony is associated with morbidity and mortality after palliation of a single ventricle. The authors hypothesized that resynchronization with optimized temporary multisite pacing postoperatively would be safe, feasible, and effective. Pacing was assessed in the intensive care unit within the first 24 h after surgery. Two unipolar atrial pacing leads and four bipolar ventricular pacing leads were placed at standardized sites intraoperatively. Pacing was optimized to maximize mean arterial pressure. The protocol tested 11 combinations of the 4 different ventricular lead sites, 6 atrioventricular delays (50-150 ms), and 14 intraventricular delays. Optimal pacing settings were thus determined and ultimately compared in four configurations: bipolar, unipolar, single-site atrioventricular pacing, and intrinsic rhythm. Each patient was his or her own control, and all pacing comparisons were implemented in random sequence. Single-ventricle palliation was performed for 17 children ages 0-21 years. Pacing increased mean arterial pressure (MAP) versus intrinsic rhythm, with the following configurations: bipolar multisite pacing increased MAP by 2.2 % (67.7 ± 2.4 to 69.2 ± 2.4 mmHg; p = 0.013) and unipolar multisite pacing increased MAP by 2.8 % (67.7 ± 2.4 to 69.6 ± 2.7 mmHg; p = 0.002). Atrioventricular single-site pacing increased MAP by 2.1 % (67.7 ± 2.4 to 69.1 ± 2.5 mmHg: p = 0.02, insignificant difference under Bonferroni correction). The echocardiographic fractional area change in nine patients increased significantly only with unipolar pacing (32 ± 3.1 to 36 ± 4.2 %; p = 0.02). No study-related adverse events occurred. Multisite pacing optimization is safe and feasible in the early postoperative period after single-ventricle palliation, with improvements in mean arterial pressure and fractional area shortening. Further study to evaluate clinical benefits is required.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app