Article Sidebar

PDF
Date Published: 30/08/2025
Abstract Views: 2
Views PDF: 0
DOI: 10.47972/vjcts.v52i.1495
Issue
Vol. 52
Section
Research Article
How to Cite
Pham, N. H. (2025). Evaluation of injury current amplitude in elderly patients undergoing right ventricular pacing. The Vietnam Journal of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, 52, 94 - 100. https://doi.org/10.47972/vjcts.v52i.1495

Evaluation of injury current amplitude in elderly patients undergoing right ventricular pacing

Nhu Hung Pham1,
1 Hanoi Heart Hospital

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objectives: Investigate the current of injury (COI) during right ventricular lead implantation at the old patients.


Methods and Results: 123 patients (pts) were implanted 2 chambers pacemaker were divided to 2 Groups. Group I included 84 pts with age < 70 years and Group II included 39 pts with age ≥ 70 years. All pts was measured the pacemaker parameters of right ventricular lead, right atrial lead and COI during lead implantation.


There is not significantly different between 2 groups in the pacemaker parameter of right ventricular implantation: at sensing amplitudes (Group I were 11,18±1,92 mV vs Group II were 10,8±2 mV; p=NS); at lead impedances (Group I were 637,6±73,51 ᾨ vs Group were II 634,09±62,21 ᾨ; p=NS) and at pacing thresholds (Group I were 0,67±0,17 V vs Group II were 0,69±0,22 V; p=NS). Similar, there is not significantly different between 2 groups in the pacemaker parameter of left ventricular implantation: at sensing amplitudes (Group I were 3,23 ± 1,56 mV vs Group II were 3,15 ± 1,38 mV; p=NS); at lead impedances (Group I were 586,31 ± 125, 82 ᾨ vs Group were II 565,21 ± 137, 62 ᾨ; p=NS) and at pacing thresholds (Group I were 0,79 ± 0,14 V vs Group II were 0,76 ± 0,21 V; p=NS). Group II gets the lower of COI amplitude at right ventricular lead versus Group I (Group II were 10,81±2,31 mV vs Group I were 14,06 ± 4,13 mV; p=0,03) but no different of COI amplitude at right atrial lead between 2 Groups (Group II were 2,91 ± 0,48 mV vs Group I were 3,02 ± 0, 32 mV; p=NS)


Conclusion: The patients with age ≥ 70 years get lower of COI amplitude than the patients with age < 70 years.

Keywords

COI, current of injury, pacemaker, implantation

Article Details

References

1. Mond HG, Irwin M, Morrilo C et al. The world survey of cardiac pacing and cardioverter defibrillators. PACE 2004;27: 955-964.
2. Phạm Như Hùng, Trần Song Giang, Trần Văn Đồng, Tạ Tiến Phước. Thực trạng cấy máy tạo nhịp 1 buồng và 2 buồng tim trong chỉ định điều trị nhịp tim chậm tại Viện Tim mạch Việt nam. Tạp chí Tim mạch học Việt nam. Số 2013; số 65: 64-69
3. Redfearn DP, Gula LJ, Krahn AD, Skanes AC, Klein GJ, et al. Current of injury predicts acute performance of catheter-delivered active fixation pacing leads. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2007; 30: 1438–1444.
4. Lê Mạnh, Trần Song Giang. Đặc điểm sóng tổn thương và mối liên quan với các thông số tạo nhịp ở bệnh nhân cấy máy tạo nhịp vĩnh viễn qua theo dõi ngắn hạn. Tạp chí tim mạch học Việt Nam 2019 số 90: 195-202
5. Phạm Như Hùng, Sóng tổn thương trong đặt máy 2 buồng tim. Tạp chí Y học Việt nam 2018; số 465 : 153-159.
6. Epstein AE, DiMarco JP, Ellenbogen KA, Estes NA 3rd, Freedman RA, Gettes LS, et al. ACC/AHA/HRS 2008 Guidelines for Device-Based Therapy of Cardiac Rhythm Abnormalities: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008 May 27. 51(21):e1-62.
7. Rajappan K. Permanent pacemaker implantation technique. Heart 2009;95;334-342.
8. Kashiwase K, Kobayashi H, Hirata A, et al. Acute changes in the pacing threshold after lead implantation. Comparison between retractable and sweet-tip active-fixation leads. Int Heart J 2012; 53:108-112.
9. Chen MR, han FL, Wang WW, Chen XH et al. Combining current of injury and P wave sensing optimized right atrial active fixation leads implantation. J Thorac Dis 2019; 11(4): 1279-1286.
10. Chen JH, Zhang FL, Chen XH, et al. Dynamic changes in current of injury predicts adequate active lead fixation in permanent pacemaker leads. Journal of Clinical Cardiology 2013; 29:819-823.
11. Haghjoo M, Mollazadeh R, Aslani A, et al. Prediction of midterm performance of active-fixation leads using current of injury. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2014; 37:231-236
12. Breitenstein A, Saguner AM, Gasperetti A, Hofer D et al. Assessment of injury current during leadless pacemaker implantation. Inter J of Cardio 2021; 323(15): 113-117
13. Shali S, Wu W, Bai J, Su Y et al. Current of injury is an indicator of lead depth and performance during left bundle branch pacing lead implantation. Heart Rhythm 2022; 19(8): 1281-1288