Cargando…
Comparing maximum rate and sustainability of pacing by mechanical vs. electrical stimulation in the Langendorff-perfused rabbit heart
AIMS: Mechanical stimulation (MS) represents a readily available, non-invasive means of pacing the asystolic or bradycardic heart in patients, but benefits of MS at higher heart rates are unclear. Our aim was to assess the maximum rate and sustainability of excitation by MS vs. electrical stimulatio...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5400084/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28011835 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/euw354 |
Sumario: | AIMS: Mechanical stimulation (MS) represents a readily available, non-invasive means of pacing the asystolic or bradycardic heart in patients, but benefits of MS at higher heart rates are unclear. Our aim was to assess the maximum rate and sustainability of excitation by MS vs. electrical stimulation (ES) in the isolated heart under normal physiological conditions. METHODS AND RESULTS: Trains of local MS or ES at rates exceeding intrinsic sinus rhythm (overdrive pacing; lowest pacing rates 2.5±0.5 Hz) were applied to the same mid-left ventricular free-wall site on the epicardium of Langendorff-perfused rabbit hearts. Stimulation rates were progressively increased, with a recovery period of normal sinus rhythm between each stimulation period. Trains of MS caused repeated focal ventricular excitation from the site of stimulation. The maximum rate at which MS achieved 1:1 capture was lower than during ES (4.2±0.2 vs. 5.9±0.2 Hz, respectively). At all overdrive pacing rates for which repetitive MS was possible, 1:1 capture was reversibly lost after a finite number of cycles, even though same-site capture by ES remained possible. The number of MS cycles until loss of capture decreased with rising stimulation rate. If interspersed with ES, the number of MS to failure of capture was lower than for MS only. CONCLUSION: In this study, we demonstrate that the maximum pacing rate at which MS can be sustained is lower than that for same-site ES in isolated heart, and that, in contrast to ES, the sustainability of successful 1:1 capture by MS is limited. The mechanism(s) of differences in MS vs. ES pacing ability, potentially important for emergency heart rhythm management, are currently unknown, thus warranting further investigation. |
---|