Probability of applying temporary cardiac pacing during percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction
Xinjing Chen
Abstract
Xinjing Chen
Abstract
Objective:To observe the probability of temporary cardiac pacing during emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. Methods: A total of 197 consecutive STEMI patients were randomly assigned for study. Patients undergoing emergency PCI in 4 h were assigned to group A(53 cases), the patients undergoing emergency PCI in 4-12 h were assigned to group B(144 cases). Compared the difference for applying temporary cardiac pacing between the two groups. Results: Baseline characteristics and angiographic characteristics showed no significant difference between the two groups (P0.05). The proportion called for temporary cardiac pacing in group A was significantly higher than that of group B (41.5% vs. 23.6%, P0.05). Conclusion: The result suggests for acute myocardial infarction patients who undergo emergency percutaneaus coronary intervention especially in 4 h must preparation cardiac pacing pipe, when cardiac pacing indications occur may promptly carry out temporary cardiac pacing.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Objective:To observe the probability of temporary cardiac pacing during emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. Methods: A total of 197 consecutive STEMI patients were randomly assigned for study. Patients undergoing emergency PCI in 4 h were assigned to group A(53 cases), the patients undergoing emergency PCI in 4-12 h were assigned to group B(144 cases). Compared the difference for applying temporary cardiac pacing between the two groups. Results: Baseline characteristics and angiographic characteristics showed no significant difference between the two groups (P0.05). The proportion called for temporary cardiac pacing in group A was significantly higher than that of group B (41.5% vs. 23.6%, P0.05). Conclusion: The result suggests for acute myocardial infarction patients who undergo emergency percutaneaus coronary intervention especially in 4 h must preparation cardiac pacing pipe, when cardiac pacing indications occur may promptly carry out temporary cardiac pacing.
Key concepts: Medicine, Conventional PCI, Myocardial infarction, Cardiology, Percutaneous coronary intervention, Internal medicine, Cardiac pacing, Significant difference