Nalazite se na CroRIS probnoj okolini. Ovdje evidentirani podaci neće biti pohranjeni u Informacijskom sustavu znanosti RH. Ako je ovo greška, CroRIS produkcijskoj okolini moguće je pristupi putem poveznice www.croris.hr
izvor podataka: crosbi

Ventricular pacing vs dual chamber pacing in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation after atrioventricular node ablation: open randomized study (CROSBI ID 140906)

Prilog u časopisu | izvorni znanstveni rad | međunarodna recenzija

Petrač, Dubravko ; Radić, Berislav ; Radeljić, Vjekoslav ; Hamel, Duško ; Filipović, Jakša Ventricular pacing vs dual chamber pacing in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation after atrioventricular node ablation: open randomized study // Croatian medical journal, 46 (2005), 6; 922-928

Podaci o odgovornosti

Petrač, Dubravko ; Radić, Berislav ; Radeljić, Vjekoslav ; Hamel, Duško ; Filipović, Jakša

engleski

Ventricular pacing vs dual chamber pacing in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation after atrioventricular node ablation: open randomized study

Aim. To compare ventricular rate responsive (VVIR) pacing with dual chamber rate responsive (DDDR) pacing and antiarrhythmic drugs for the treatment of patients with persistent atrial fibrillation after atrioventricular node ablation. Methods.One hundered two patients with persistent atrial fibrillation eligible for the atrioventricular node ablation were randomly assigned to the therapy with either VVIR pacemaker (n=52) or DDDR pacemaker and antiarrhythmic drugs (n=50). After ablation, patients in both pacing groups were assigned to take anticoagulant therapy. The primary end point was stroke or death from cardiovascular causes. Results. After a mean follow-up of 26.6+-9.5 months, there was no difference in the stroke or death rates between patients with VVIR pacing (6 or 5.2% per year) and those with DDDR pacing and antiarrhythmic drugs (6 or 5.9% per year, P=0.930). The observed rates of death from all causes, hospitalization for heart failure, and myocardial ischemia were similar in the two patient groups. There was a significant lower rate of development of permanent atrial fibrillation in patients with DDDR pacing and antiarrhythmic drugs, with a reduction in absolute risk by 56% and relative risk by 64% (32% vs 88%, P<0.001). Conclusion. With respect to cardiovascular death and morbidity, VVIR pacing is not inferior to DDDR pacing and antiarrhythmic drugs for the treatment of patients with persistent atrial fibrillation after atrioventricular node ablation and may be considered as an appropriate therapy for such patients.

pacing; persistent atrial fibrillation; AV node ablation

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

Podaci o izdanju

46 (6)

2005.

922-928

objavljeno

0353-9504

Povezanost rada

Kliničke medicinske znanosti

Indeksiranost