论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较常规消融方法困难的房室结折返性心动过速(AVNRT)Koch三角下位与中位线性消融两种方法的有效性和安全性。方法:回顾性分析比较常规消融方法困难的房室结折返性心动过速Koch三角下位线性消融(三尖瓣环至冠状窦口中部)和中位线性消融(三尖瓣环至希氏束与冠状窦口连线的中下1/3交界水平)的手术成功率、慢径消除率、放电时间和操作时间。结果:下位和中位线性消融均具有较高的成功率(94.4%、100%)。在放电时间上,下位法消融组显著高于中位法线性消融[(578±177)m svs(481±185)m s,P<0.01],而整个手术操作时间,下位法组要明显低于中位法[(153±51)m svs(199±56)m s,P<0.01)]。在消融过程中,中位法出现1例一过性Ⅰ度房室传导阻滞,两组无任何程度的持续房室传导阻滞发生。结论:对常规方法消融后复发的AVNRT,Koch三角下位线性消融与中位线性消融方法均较为安全,但下位法可能操作更简洁。
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of two methods of Koch triangular inferior and median ablation of atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) with conventional ablation methods. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted to compare the results of linear ablation (tricuspid annulus to coronary ostial middle) and median ablation (atrial tricuspid annulus to His bundle) of atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia Coronary sinus ostium connection in the lower third of the junction) the success rate of surgery, slow path elimination rate, discharge time and operation time. Results: Both lower and median linear ablation had a higher success rate (94.4%, 100%). In the discharge time, the lower ablation group was significantly higher than the median linear ablation [(578 ± 177) m svs (481 ± 185) ms, P <0.01], while the total operation time, Median method [(153 ± 51) m svs (199 ± 56) ms, P <0.01)]. In the ablation process, the median method showed a case of transient degree Ⅰ atrioventricular block, two groups without any degree of persistent atrioventricular block occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Both conventional linear ablation and median linear ablation of AVNRT after conventional ablation are safe, but the lower abdomen method may be more concise to operate.