Short term outcomes with dual chamber versus single chamber pacing for atrioventricular block - A crossover trial

双腔起搏与单腔起搏治疗房室传导阻滞的短期疗效比较——一项交叉试验

阅读:1

Abstract

A total of 42 patients were studied for primary outcomes of quality of life and 6MWD between VVIR and DDD modes. At end of 2 months after device implantation, randomization was done and the device was programmed to VVIR or DDD modes. At the end of 2 months in this mode QOL and functional was assessed and the patient was switched to other mode. The same protocol was followed at the end of 2 months. We found no difference in functional capacity and quality of life between the two pacing modes. None of the patients developed pacemaker syndrome and there was no preference for any of the modes.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。