Pacemaker Therapy in Isolated Congenital Complete Atrioventricular Block

BREUR, J.M.P.J., et al.: Pacemaker Therapy in Isolated Congenital Complete Atrioventricular Block. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of pacemaker (PM) therapy in patients with isolated congenital complete atrioventricular block (CCAVB). Patients with CCAVB eventually qualify for PM im...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pacing and clinical electrophysiology 2002-12, Vol.25 (12), p.1685-1691
Hauptverfasser: BREUR, JOHANNES M.P.J., UDINK Ten Cate, FLORIS E.A., KAPUSTA, LIVIA, COHEN, MITCHELL I., CROSSON, JANE E., BORAMANAND, NICOLE, LUBBERS, LOUISE J., FRIEDMAN, ALAN H., BRENNER, JOEL I., VETTER, VICTORIA L., SREERAM, NARAYANSWAMI, MEIJBOOM, ERIK J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:BREUR, J.M.P.J., et al.: Pacemaker Therapy in Isolated Congenital Complete Atrioventricular Block. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of pacemaker (PM) therapy in patients with isolated congenital complete atrioventricular block (CCAVB). Patients with CCAVB eventually qualify for PM implantation, however, timing remains controversial. Retrospective evaluation of left ventricular end‐diastolic diameter (LVEDD), shortening fraction (SF), and cardiothoracic ratio (CTR) in 149 CCAVB patients, before, at, and after PM implantation was carried out. LVEDD shows an average increase of 0.48%/month in non‐PM patients, and an average decrease of 0.88%/month in PM patients. SF shows an average increase of 0.10%/month in non‐PM, and an average decrease of 0.32%/month in PM patients. CTR shows an average increase of 0.02%/month in non‐PM, and an average decrease of 0.19%/month in PM patients. The difference between the non‐PM and PM groups is significant (P = 0.05) for all variables. Symptomatic patients show no significant change in LVEDD after PM therapy (from 66.5% before to 68.5% after PM therapy). Asymptomatic patients do show a significant (P < 0.001) decrease in LVEDD after PM therapy (from 78.4% before to 73.3% after PM therapy). CTR does not differ significantly between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients before PM therapy (58% and 57%, respectively). CTR does differ significantly (P < 0.001) between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients after PM therapy (52% and 48%, respectively). Heart size and SF are increased in most patients with isolated CCAVB. PM implantation is associated with a decrease in heart size and normalization of SF in most patients. Indications for PM therapy in children may require reevaluation in asymptomatic patients with increased cardiac size and decreased cardiac function.
ISSN:0147-8389
1540-8159
DOI:10.1046/j.1460-9592.2002.01685.x