The deleterious effects of long-term right ventricular pacing necessitated the search for alternative pacing sites which could prevent or alleviate pacinginduced cardiomyopathy.Until recently,biventricular pacing(BiVP...The deleterious effects of long-term right ventricular pacing necessitated the search for alternative pacing sites which could prevent or alleviate pacinginduced cardiomyopathy.Until recently,biventricular pacing(BiVP)was the only modality which could mitigate or prevent pacing induced dysfunction.Further,BiVP could resynchronize the baseline electromechanical dssynchrony in heart failure and improve outcomes.However,the high non-response rate of around 20%-30%remains a major limitation.This non-response has been largely attributable to the direct non-physiological stimulation of the left ventricular myocardium bypassing the conduction system.To overcome this limitation,the concept of conduction system pacing(CSP)came up.Despite initial success of the first CSP via His bundle pacing(HBP),certain drawbacks including lead instability and dislodgements,steep learning curve and rapid battery depletion on many occasions prevented its widespread use for cardiac resynchronization therapy(CRT).Subsequently,CSP via left bundle branch-area pacing(LBBP)was developed in 2018,which over the last few years has shown efficacy comparable to BiVP-CRT in small observational studies.Further,its safety has also been well established and is largely free of the pitfalls of the HBP-CRT.In the recent metanalysis by Yasmin et al,comprising of 6 studies with 389 participants,LBBPCRT was superior to BiVP-CRT in terms of QRS duration,left ventricular ejection fraction,cardiac chamber dimensions,lead thresholds,and functional status amongst heart failure patients with left bundle branch block.However,there are important limitations of the study including the small overall numbers,inclusion of only a single small randomized controlled trial(RCT)and a small follow-up duration.Further,the entire study population analyzed was from China which makes generalizability a concern.Despite the concerns,the meta-analysis adds to the growing body of evidence demonstrating the efficacy of LBBP-CRT.At this stage,one must acknowledge that the fact that stil展开更多
Neutrophil peptide 1 belongs to a family of peptides involved in innate immunity. Continuous intramuscular injection of neutrophil peptide 1 can promote the regeneration of peripheral nerves, but clinical application ...Neutrophil peptide 1 belongs to a family of peptides involved in innate immunity. Continuous intramuscular injection of neutrophil peptide 1 can promote the regeneration of peripheral nerves, but clinical application in this manner is not convenient. To this end, the effects of a single intraoperative administration of neutrophil peptide 1 on peripheral nerve regeneration were experimentally observed. A rat model of sciatic nerve crush injury was established using the clamp method. After model establishment, a normal saline group and a neutrophil peptide 1 group were injected with a single dose of normal saline or 10 μg/mL neutrophil peptide 1, respectively. A sham group, without sciatic nerve crush was also prepared as a control. Sciatic nerve function tests, neuroelectrophysiological tests, and hematoxylin-eosin staining showed that the nerve conduction velocity, sciatic functional index, and tibialis anterior muscle fiber cross-sectional area were better in the neutrophil peptide 1 group than in the normal saline group at 4 weeks after surgery. At 4 and 8 weeks after surgery, there were no differences in the wet weight of the tibialis anterior muscle between the neutrophil peptide 1 and saline groups. Histological staining of the sciatic nerve showed no significant differences in the number of myelinated nerve fibers or the axon cross-sectional area between the neutrophil peptide 1 and normal saline groups. The above data confirmed that a single dose of neutrophil peptide 1 during surgery can promote the recovery of neurological function 4 weeks after sciatic nerve injury. All the experiments were approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Peking University People's Hospital, China(approval No. 2015-50) on December 9, 2015.展开更多
文摘The deleterious effects of long-term right ventricular pacing necessitated the search for alternative pacing sites which could prevent or alleviate pacinginduced cardiomyopathy.Until recently,biventricular pacing(BiVP)was the only modality which could mitigate or prevent pacing induced dysfunction.Further,BiVP could resynchronize the baseline electromechanical dssynchrony in heart failure and improve outcomes.However,the high non-response rate of around 20%-30%remains a major limitation.This non-response has been largely attributable to the direct non-physiological stimulation of the left ventricular myocardium bypassing the conduction system.To overcome this limitation,the concept of conduction system pacing(CSP)came up.Despite initial success of the first CSP via His bundle pacing(HBP),certain drawbacks including lead instability and dislodgements,steep learning curve and rapid battery depletion on many occasions prevented its widespread use for cardiac resynchronization therapy(CRT).Subsequently,CSP via left bundle branch-area pacing(LBBP)was developed in 2018,which over the last few years has shown efficacy comparable to BiVP-CRT in small observational studies.Further,its safety has also been well established and is largely free of the pitfalls of the HBP-CRT.In the recent metanalysis by Yasmin et al,comprising of 6 studies with 389 participants,LBBPCRT was superior to BiVP-CRT in terms of QRS duration,left ventricular ejection fraction,cardiac chamber dimensions,lead thresholds,and functional status amongst heart failure patients with left bundle branch block.However,there are important limitations of the study including the small overall numbers,inclusion of only a single small randomized controlled trial(RCT)and a small follow-up duration.Further,the entire study population analyzed was from China which makes generalizability a concern.Despite the concerns,the meta-analysis adds to the growing body of evidence demonstrating the efficacy of LBBP-CRT.At this stage,one must acknowledge that the fact that stil
基金funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China,No.31571236(to YHK)the Key Laboratory of Trauma and Neural Regeneration(Peking University),Ministry of Education,China,No.BMU2019XY007-01(to YHK)+1 种基金the Ministry of Education Innovation Program of China,No.IRT_16R01(to YHK)the Research and Development Funds of Peking University People’s Hospital,China,Nos.RDH2017-01(to YHK),RDY2018-09(to HL)。
文摘Neutrophil peptide 1 belongs to a family of peptides involved in innate immunity. Continuous intramuscular injection of neutrophil peptide 1 can promote the regeneration of peripheral nerves, but clinical application in this manner is not convenient. To this end, the effects of a single intraoperative administration of neutrophil peptide 1 on peripheral nerve regeneration were experimentally observed. A rat model of sciatic nerve crush injury was established using the clamp method. After model establishment, a normal saline group and a neutrophil peptide 1 group were injected with a single dose of normal saline or 10 μg/mL neutrophil peptide 1, respectively. A sham group, without sciatic nerve crush was also prepared as a control. Sciatic nerve function tests, neuroelectrophysiological tests, and hematoxylin-eosin staining showed that the nerve conduction velocity, sciatic functional index, and tibialis anterior muscle fiber cross-sectional area were better in the neutrophil peptide 1 group than in the normal saline group at 4 weeks after surgery. At 4 and 8 weeks after surgery, there were no differences in the wet weight of the tibialis anterior muscle between the neutrophil peptide 1 and saline groups. Histological staining of the sciatic nerve showed no significant differences in the number of myelinated nerve fibers or the axon cross-sectional area between the neutrophil peptide 1 and normal saline groups. The above data confirmed that a single dose of neutrophil peptide 1 during surgery can promote the recovery of neurological function 4 weeks after sciatic nerve injury. All the experiments were approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Peking University People's Hospital, China(approval No. 2015-50) on December 9, 2015.
