Objective CRT has gained acceptance as a useful form of device therapy for patients with refractory congestive heart failure. Despite recent technical advances, some problem still remained unsolved. The study highlighted some of these issues and try to provide possible solutions. Methods Since February 1999, about 50 patients underwent CRT. The CS lead was implanted with PTCA wire for dislodgment of lead in 3 patients. Injury of CS was present in 5 patients. Elevation in left ventricular pacing threshold was found in 2 patients who received early CRT. Results The patients who implanted the CS lead with PTCA wire acquired satisfactory capture threshold without any complication. Pace makers were implanted successfully in all 5 patients with CS injury The CS leads were extracted successfully from the 2 patients with elevated ventricular pacing threstold. Conclusion Implantation of the CS lead is a main step in the operation of CRT and prompt management to its related problems can enhance the operation success rate.

Objective: To conduct a preliminary evaluation for the usability of Carelink remote monitoring system by clinical physician. Methods: A total of 215 patients received cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) with Carelink remote monitoring function from 12 hospitals in China between 2012-01 and 2013-10 were prospectively enrolled. The patient's mean age was (62.3±14.3) years including 108 male and 107 female. There were 54 physicians completed questionnaire survey. Based on the type of CIED, the patients were divided into3 groups: PM (pace maker) group,n=110, ICD (implantable cardioverter defibrillator) group,n=54 and CRT (cardiac resynchronization therapy) group,n=51. The patients received routine hospital visit at 3 months of CIED implantation and meanwhile, they performed device data transmission at 3 and 6 months of Carelink remote monitoring. The time physician spent to evaluate data was collected at 3 months and the questionnaire survey was completed by physician at 6 months after CIED implantation. Results: All 54 physicians felt that Carelink remote monitoring system was simple to operate and easy to use. There were 147 patients ifnished hospital visit at 3 months after CIED implantation, the mean time for physician to evaluate data was (14.8±8.4) min; 150 patients ifnished Carelink remote monitor at 3 months after CIED implantation, the mean time for physician to evaluate data was (8.2 ±4.6) min,P<0.0001.Conclusion: Carelink remote monitoring system was easy to use, it may save time in follow-up study which with high satisfaction in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVETo compare the efficacy and safety of 5 mg perindopril arginine salt and 4 mg perindopril tert-butylamine salt for patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension.

METHODSThe study was designed as multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active controlled trial with two parallel groups enrolling 524 participants with mild to moderate essential hypertension. After 2-week run-in period, 186 patients were enrolled and randomly treated with 5 mg perindopril arginine salt and 183 patients were enrolled and randomly treated with 4 mg perindopril tert-butylamine salt. The random sequence was generated by the I.R.I.S., and a balance was made in each center. After double-blind treatment for 8 weeks, the dose could be doubled for patients with uncontrolled BP ((SBP) ≥ 140 mmHg (1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa) or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥ 90 mmHg) and patients were treated for another 4 weeks.

RESULTSThe sitting SBP was similarly decreased by (19.9 ± 17.2) mmHg in perindopril arginine group and (18.5 ± 14.7) mmHg (P = 0.000 5) in perindopril tert-butylamine group post 8 weeks treatment. Dose was doubled in 109 patients (59.9%) in perindopril arginine group and 116 patients (63.7%) in perindopril tert-butylamine group. At 12 weeks post therapy, the sitting SBP decreased by (19.8 ± 16.2) and (19.6 ± 16.3) mmHg respectively in the 2 groups. The decrease of sitting DBP was also similar in both groups (-12.0 ± 10.0) mmHg and (-11.0 ± 8.9) mmHg (P < 0.000 1), respectively. The control rate or response rate was also similar between the two groups (control rate over 8 weeks was 38.5% vs. 31.3%, 95% CI (-2.6-16.9), control rate over 12 weeks was 36.3% vs. 35.7%, 95% CI (-9.3-10.4), response rate over 8 weeks was 64.3% vs. 63.2%, 95% CI (-8.8-11.0), response rate over 12 weeks was 65.9% vs. 64.8%, 95% CI (-8.7-10.9)). Incidence of adverse events was low and similar in both therapy groups.

CONCLUSIONSThe results show that perindopril arginine salt 5 mg is as efficient as perindopril tert-butylamine 4 mg on lowering BP for patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Both drugs have good safety profile and are well tolerated by patients in this cohort.

Antihypertensive Agents ; Arginine ; Blood Pressure ; Butylamines ; Double-Blind Method ; Essential Hypertension ; Humans ; Hypertension ; Perindopril ; Sodium Chloride