Efficacy of single lead VDD pacing in patients with impaired and normal left ventricular function

Atrial synchronous ventricular pacing seems to be the best pacing mode for patients with advanced AV block and impaired LV function. The long-term follow-up of single lead VDD pacing was studied in 33 patients with impaired LV function and compared to 42 patients with normal LV function. All patients received the same VDD lead and VDDR pacemaker. The lead model with 13-cm AV spacing between the atrial and ventricular electrode was implanted in 89% of the patients. Follow-ups were 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after implantation. The percentage of atrial sensing and the P wave amplitude were determined at each follow-up. Minimal P wave amplitude at implantation was 2.0 +/- 1.4 mV in patients with impaired and 1.7 +/- 0.9 mV with normal LV function (not significant). At the 12-month follow-up, 33 patients with normal and 23 patients with depressed LV function remained paced in the VDD mode. The remaining patients died in five (impaired LV function) and seven cases (normal LV function) or their pacemakers were programmed to the VVI/VVIR pacing mode in four (impaired LV function) and three cases (normal LV function). P wave amplitude did not differ in the two groups (e.g., at month 12: impaired: 1.17 +/- 0.42 mV; normal: 1.09 +/- 0.49 mV). The atrial sensitivity was programmed in most patients to sensitive settings with no differences between the two groups (e.g., at month 12: impaired: 0.13 +/- 0.06 mV; normal: 0.13 +/- 0.05 mV). The diagnostic counters indicated nearly permanent atrial sensing (e.g., at month 12: impaired: 99.3 +/- 2.2%; normal: 99.0 +/- 1.0 mV). In conclusions, single lead VDD pacing restored AV synchronous ventricular pacing in patients with normal and with impaired LV function indicating that it could be an alternative to DDD pacemakers, but not to dual-chamber pacing.     

A New Pacemaker for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Treated with Radiofrequency Ablation of the AV Junction

Atrial fibrillation is a relative contraindication to atrial synchronous pacing because of the risk of the tracking of rapid atrial rhythms by the pacemaker. In this study, we describe the clinical results of an AV synchronous rate responsive pacemaker with an original algorithm, which is able to sense pathological increments in atrial rate and automatically to switch into a non-AV synchronous mode of pacing. This pacemaker was implanted in 12 patients who had undergone radiofrequency ablation of the A V junction in order to cure severely symptomatic, drug refractory, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. In an acute, intrapatient comparison between the standard AV synchronous mode and the automatic switching mode, ventricular tracking of atrial fibrillation occurred in 35% and 4% of total beats at rest and in 24% and 2% of total beats during exercise, respectively (P < 0.001). During 5 ± 4 months of follow-up, no further tachyarrhythmia related symptoms occurred. In conclusion, the standard DDDR mode is unable to eliminate ventricular tracking of atrial fibrillation, thus undermining the efficacy of AV junction ablation therapy. The automatic switching mode eliminates this adverse effect of dual chamber pacing.     

Initial Clinical Experience with a Single Pass VDDR Pacing System

Although ventricular rate adaptive pacing (VVIR) improves exercise capacity and cardiac output compared to constant rate ventricular pacing (WI), this pacing mode does not provide benefit of atrioventricular (AV) synchrony. We evaluated the use of a custom-built VDDR pacing system using a single pass, ventricular lead, which detects end cavity P wave using a pair of diagonally arranged atrial bipolar (DAB) electrodes. In the VDDR mode, AV synchrony is enabled and the P wave rate is used in conjunction with an accelerometer based activity sensor for rate adaptive pacing. A VDDR pacemaker was implanted in three patients with complete AV block (mean age 63 ± 1 year) and the mean implantation time was 29 minutes. Mean P wave amplitude was 2.4 mV (1.2–4.2 mV) at implantation and telemeter P wave amplitude was stable over a follow-up of 6 months. At a sensitivity of 0.2 mV, stable P wave sensing was observed during breathing maneuvers, arm swinging, my potential induction, and Holter recording. Paired exercise tests performed in the VDDR and VVIR modes showed higher cardiac output at rest, during exercise, and in the recovery period in the VDDR pacing mode. Thus VDDR pacing using a single pass lead is superior to VVIR pacing by enabling P synchronous ventricular pacing without adding to the complexity of implantation.     

Single Lead VDD Pacing: Multicenter Study

Optimal treatment for patients with AV block and normal sinoatrial node (SA) function entails atrial sensing and ventricular pacing (VDD mode). Single-lead VDD pacing preserves AV synchrony, precludes the need to insert two leads, and makes the implanter's work simpler and quicker. Our objectives were to verify the performance of the Thera(tm) VDD pacing system (Medtronic, Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA), and evaluate the effectiveness of its atrial sensing and its ventricular sensing and pacing. In 165 patients, 150 adults (mean age 62 ± 18 years) and 15 children (mean age 7 ± 5 years) with 1°–3° AV block and normal SA node function, a Thera VDD system (Models 8948 or 8968) was implanted. Intraoperative ventricular electrical measurements were not significantly different from those of VVI pacemakers. The mean amplitude of the atrial signal during implantation was 4.1 ± 1.9 mV. Optimal atrial signals during implantation were usually obtained in the mid or lower part of the right atrium by using a special technique. Adequate atrial measurements remained stable throughout 24 months. There was no difference between serial measurements of atrial signal amplitudes at predischarge and during follow-up visits. Reposition of the lead was done in 2 patients (1.4%), and reprogramming to VVI in 7 patients: due to atrial fibrillation in 3 (1.8%) and due to atrial undersensing in 4 patients (2.4%). Thera VDD pacing is reliable and easy to manage with dependable atrial sensing and ventricular pacing. The survival rate of VDD pacing at 2 years was 96%.     

P Wave Recognition and Atrial Stimulation with Fractally Iridium Coated VDD Single Pass Leads

The bottleneck of VDD systems is the reliable detection of the small atrial signals by a floating atrial electrode. Fractally iridium coated electrodes offer excellent sensing and pacing performance. In this study, the performance of such a floating atrial lead in P wave sensing and synchronous ventricular stimulation was examined. Atrial pacing was also used as a test of atrial wall contact. Patients and Methods : A fractally iridium coated VDDlead was implanted in 18 patients. In 15 patients it was interfaced with a VDD pacemaker and in 3 patients with a DDD system depending on the P wave amplitude measured acutely (≥ 2 mV). Simultaneous recordings of the surface ECG and pacemaker telemetry were used to analyze P wave amplitudes and AV synchrony in different body positions, and during normal and deep breathing. Additionally, exercise tests based on daily life activities and 24-hour ECG monitoring were performed to test the pacemaker function. Results : During implantation P wave amplitudes were 1.86 mV ± 1.08 mV (range 0.5–4.9 mV) and during follow-up (6.6 ± 5.6 weeks) 0.18–3.8 mV. Holter recordings revealed reliable P wave sensing at a sensitivity setting of 0.5 mV (95.5%). P wave sensing was further improved by a higher atrial sensitivity. AV synchronous pacing ± 99.9% was achieved in all patients. In 7 patients the atrial electrode could be positioned close to the atrial wall enabling atrial stimulation thresholds at an average of 4.3 volts. Conclusion : This fractally iridium coated VVD lead allowed consistent and reliable P wave sensing at an atrial sensitivity as low as 0.5 mV in selected patients.     

Long-Term Stability of P Wave Sensing in Single Lead VDDR Pacing: Clinical Versus Subclinical Atrial Undersensing

Optimal function of a single lead P wave synchronous rate adaptive ventricular pacing system (VDDR) requires reliable P wave sensing over time and during daily activities. The stability of P wave sensing and the incidence of sensitivity reprogramming in a single pass lead with a diagonally arranged bipole was assessed in 30 patients with complete atrioventricular block over a follow-up period of 12 ± 1 months (range 6 months to 3 years). Atrial sensing was assessed during clinic visits, by physical maneuvers (postural changes, breathing, Valsalva maneuver, walking and isometric exercise), maximum treadmill exercise and Holter recordings. P wave amplitude at implantation was 1.21 ± 0.09 (0.5–3.6) mV, and the atrial sensing threshold remained stable over the entire period of follow-up. Using an atrial sensitivity based on twice the sensing threshold at 1 month, P wave undersensing was found in 2, 4, 3, and 7 patients during clinic visit, physical maneuvers, exercise, and Holter recordings, respectively. Atrial sensitivity reprogramming was performed in three patients based on the correction of undersensing during physical maneuvers. Although eight patients had atrial undersensing on Holter recordings, the number of undersensed P waves was small (total 101 beats or 0.013%± 0.001% of total ventricular beats) and no patient was symptomatic. One patient had intermittent atrial undersensing at the highest sensitivity, but the VDDR mode was still functional most of the time. No patient had myopotential interference at ihe programmed sensitivity. One patient developed chronic atrial fibrillation and was programmed to the VVIR mode. Thus, single lead VDDR pacing is a stable pacing mode in 97% of patients. Because of the large variability of P wave amplitude, the use of a sensitivity margin at least three times the atrial sensitivity threshold will maximize atrial sensing and minimize the need for atrial sensitivity reprogramming (1/30 patients). Physical maneuvers and exercise tests are effective means for rapid assess ment of the adequacy of P wave sensing.     

U.S. Experience with the AddVent VDD(R) Pacing System

The AddVent pacemaker generator and model 1328C AV single-pass lead is a new pacemaker system capable of VDD or VDDR modes. The purpose of this study was to present the initial experience with AddVent in the United States and Canada. Between May 10, 1995 and May 3, 1996, 53 devices were implanted in 52 patients and followed for a mean of 217 (±39) days. At the predischarge, 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-up evaluations, atrial sensing thresholds and ventricular sensing and capture thresholds were measured in the supine, sitting, and standing positions to evaluate stability of atrial sensing with respect to body posture at rest. At the 1-month follow-up, a treadmill exercise test was performed to evaluate atrial sensing during exercise and to evaluate two new features of the AddVent called "sensor-mediated rate smoothing" and "preferential P wave sensing." Atrial sensing thresholds were not significantly different (P > 0.05) among body postures for any follow-up period or among follow-up periods for each posture. At rest, the percentage of appropriately tracked P waves observed was > 99% at each follow-up period. During treadmill exercise, the percentage of appropriately tracked P waves was > 98.7%. Appropriate preferential P wave sensing and sensor-mediated rate smoothing (VDDR mode) was observed. The AddVent pacing system provides safe and effective pacing therapy. Several features of VDDR pacing offer advantages over standard VDD pacing.     

Safety of pacemaker implantation prior to radiofrequency ablation of atrioventricular junction in a single session procedure

RF current delivery may cause acute and chronic dysfunction of previously implanted pacemakers. The aim of this study was to assess prospectively the effects of RF energy on Thera I and Kappa pacemakers in 70 consecutive patients (mean age 70 ± 11 years, mean left ventricular ejection fraction 48 ± 15%) who underwent RF ablation of the AV junction for antiarrhythmic drug refractory atrial fibrillation (permanent in 42 patients, paroxysmal in 28). These pacing systems incorporate protection elements to avoid electromagnetic interference. The pacemakers (Thera DR 7960 I in 20 patients, Thera SR 8960 1 in 30, Kappa DR 600–601 in 8, Kappa SR 700–701 in 12) were implanted prior to RF ablation in a single session procedure and were transiently programmed to VVI mode at a rate of 30 beats/min. Capsure SP and Z unibipolar leads were used. During RF application there was continuous monitoring of three ECG leads, endocavitary electrograms, and event markers. Complete AV block was achieved in all cases after 3.6 ± 2.9 RF pulses and 100 ± 75 seconds of RF energy delivery. The mean time of pacemaker implantation and RF ablation was 60 ± 20 minutes. Transient or permanent pacemaker dysfunction including under/oversensing, reversion to a "noise-mode" pacing, pacing inhibition, reprogramming, or recycling were not observed. Leads impedance, sensing, and pacing thresholds remained in the normal range in the acute and long-term phase (average follow-up 18 ± 12 months). In conclusion, Thera I and Kappa pacemakers exhibit excellent protection against interference produced by RF current. The functional integrity of the pacemakers and Capsure leads was observed in the acute and chronic phases. Thus, the implantation of these pacing systems prior to RF ablation of the AV junction can be recommended.     

Comparative Evaluation of Acute and Long-Term Clinical Performance of Two Single Lead Atrial Synchronous Ventricular (VDD) Pacemakers: Diagonally Arranged Bipolar Versus Closely Spaced Bipolar Ring Electrodes

Floating P wave sensing can be derived from bipolar atrial electrodes with different electrode configurations, although the relative clinical efficacy of these methods of atrial sensing has not been studied. We evaluated 32 sex and age matched patients with advanced AV block who received A V synchronous pacers using either a single lead with diagonally arranged bipole (Unity VDDR, Model 292, Intermedics Inc.) or closely spaced bipolar complete ring electrodes (Them VDD, Model 8948, Medtronic Inc.). The total surface area of the atrial electrodes were 17.2 and 25 mm², and the highest programmable atrial sensitivities were 0.1 and 0.25 mV, respectively. Atrial electrogram amplitude and sensing threshold were evaluated at implant and at each follow-up clinic visit (1, 3, and 6 months), Stability of atrial sensing was assessed during physical maneuvers, treadmill exercise test, and Holier recording. Atrial electrogram amplitude at implantation was higher in the Them VDD (2.08 ± 0.79 vs 1,45 ± 0.59 mV in Unity VDDR; P < 0.05), but the value of atrial sensing threshold was lower during follow-up than Unity VDDR. P wave undersensing was additionally observed with both pacemakers during physical maneuvers and exercise testing (6%-19% of patients). Two and four patients had atrial undersensing on Holter in the Unity VDDR and Them VDD, respectively, and the percentage P wave undersensing were 0.88%± 2.41% versus 3.63%± 8.16%, respectively. Reprogramming of the atrial sensitivity in the Unity VDDR and the use of investigational software allowing 0.18 mV atrial sensitivity to be programmed in the Them VDD substantially reduced the percentage of P wave undersensing on Holter to 0.46%± 1.67% and 0.10%± 0.24%, respectively. Beginning at discharge with a programmed atrial sensitivity level at least twice the sensing margin, the mean atrial sensitivity level was reprogrammed from 0.29 to 0.26 mV for Unity VDDR and 0.33 to 0.24 mV for Them VDD at 6 months. There was no incidence of atrial oversensing. Despite differences in atrial amplitudes at implantation between the diagonally arranged bipole and closely spaced full ring single lead systems, the clinical performances of atrial sensing were similar at an appropriately high atrial sensitivities. The absence of atrial oversensing suggests that single pass VDD pacemakers should probably be programmed at the highest available atrial sensitivity to ensure adequate P wave sensing as guided by physical maneuvers and Holter recording to minimize the need of subsequent reprogramming.     

Evolution of Atrial Signals from a Single Lead VDD Pacemaker

The atrial sensing capabilities of a new single pass lead VDD pacing system (Pacesetter AddVent) were assessed in a prospective multicenter study of 101 implants during the period July 1994 through March 1996. The pacing lead (Pacesetter AV Plus) has a unique quadripolar 4-in-line connector and uses a pair of ring electrodes with an interelectrode spacing of 12 mm for atrial sensing. The mean age of the patients (51 men) was 73 years (range 19–91). Seventy-five patients had complete heart block; the others had 2:1 AV block. Wide variations were found in signal amplitude: mean P wave amplitude, measured over four cycles in the supine position, was 2.4 ± 1.9 mV at implant, dropping to 1.9 ± 1.7 mV predischarge, and remaining constant at follow-up but with a narrower range. Holter monitoring was undertaken in 24 patients, with a total of 550 monitored hours. Mean AV synchrony was 98.2%± 4.6% (excluding premature ventricular contractions), with 20 patients (83%) showing > 99% AV synchrony, with atrial sensing at 0.1 mV where needed. No oversensing was observed in any patient. There was a low incidence of atrial fibrillation (2%) and sinus bradycardia (0%). The findings show that the range of atrial signals, although wide initially, converges over the first year and remains adequate for reliable AV synchronous pacing.     

Successful Results of a Bipolar Active Fixation Lead for Atrial Application: An Interim Analysis

Adequate atrial lead performance consists of stable sensing and pacing properties. To evaluate whether the CPI 4269 bipolar lead, covered with mannitol (Sweet Tip), in the atrial position encounters these properties, we performed a prospective study of this lead. After complete dissolution of the mannitol helix, mapping of the atrium to obtain the highest electrogram and lowest threshold was followed by screw-in into the endocardium. Intraoperative measurements were performed and long-term follow-up was scheduled every 6 to 12 months to measure threshold and perform an intracardial electro-gram. Between February 1993 and December 1996, a total number of 73 leads in the atrial position in a consecutive series of patients was implanted. Implantation was performed in 28 patients receiving an AAIR and 45 patients a DDDR pacemaker. Reason for pacemaker implantation was a third-degree AV block in 37% of patients, type II second-degree AV block in 25%, sick sinus syndrome in 35%, and drug refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation following His-bundle ablation in 3%. The intraoperative bipolar atrial electrogram had a mean voltage of 4.25 ± 2.1 mV. The acute atrial bipolar threshold was 0.63 ± 0.43 V, and current was 1.35 ± 0.81 mA at a 1.0-ms pulse duration. The mean acute resistance of the lead was 572 ± 86 Ohm. After a mean follow-up of 18.3 months, the bipolar intracardial electrogram was 3.37 ± 2.00 mV, the mean atrial threshold measured at the last outpatient clinic visit was 0.99 ± 0.74 V and the mean impedance was 640 ±127 Ohm. A sensing problem due to traction of the atrial lead occurred in only one patient. Acute and late dislodgement did not occur. The CPI 4269 (Sweet Tip) lead is manufactured with a dissolvable capsule covering the helix tip electrode, permitting a safe passage through the venous system. This interim analysis shows that this lead in the atrial position has favorable acute and chronic results.     

Single Pass Lead VDD Pacing in Children and Adolescents

Implantation of permanent pacemakers in children and adolescents is possible but usually is limited to single chamber generators. The natural growth of these patients may require physiological pacing, but until recently two leads were required for this type of pacing. The single pass lead VDD pacing mode makes posible physiological pacing by using only one lead, for both atrial sensing and ventricular sensing and pacing. The feasibility of VDD pacing using endocardial lead was evaluated in 16 children and adolescents with congenital or postsurgical atrioventricular block. Their mean age was 7.9 ± 4.9 years (range 1-16 years) and the smallest patient's weight was 8.2 kg. In all the patients, a single pass pacing lead with atrial sensing rings and bipolar ventricular pacing and sensing capability was implanted through the left or right subclavian vein. The pacemaker generator was implanted in a rectopectoral position. The mean atrial electrogram during the implantation was 4.2 ± 2.1 mV and 2.6 ± 1.9 mV after a mean of 1 week. The ventricular pacing threshold was 0.5 ± 0.2 V; the ventricular pacing impedance was 560 ± 95 Ω and the ventricular electrogram amplitude was 9.9 ± 2.1 mV. This is a first report to demonstrate the feasibility of atrial synchronous ventricular endocardial pacing using a single pass lead in a relatively large group of children and adolescents.     

VDD(R) Pacing: Short- and Long-Term Stability of Atrial Sensing with a Single Lead System

Background: Recent studies have shown that the atrial signal can reliably be sensed for VDD(R) pacing via atrial floating electrodes incorporated in a single-pass lead. However, there remains concern about the long-term stability of atrial sensing and proper VDD function under real-life conditions. This study investigated the long-term reliability of atrial sensing and atrioventricular synchronous pacing using a new single lead VDD(R) pacing system. Methods and Results: In 20 consecutive patients (ages 71 ± 14 years) with normal sinus node function and high-degree heart block, a single lead VDD(R) pacemaker (Unity(tm), Intermedics) was implanted, Atrial sensing was studied at implantation, at discharge, and at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months of follow-up. At implant, the measured P wave amplitude was 2.3 ± 1.2 mV. By telemetry, the atrial sensing threshold was 0.79 ± 0.41 mV at discharge, 0.75 ± 0.43 mV at 1 month, 0.73 ± 0.43 mV at 3 months, 0.76 ± 0.41 mV at 6 months, 0.79 ± 0.41 mV at 12 months, and 0.77 ± 0.35 mV at 18 months of follow-up (P = NS). Appropriate VDD pacing was assessed by the percentage of correct atrial synchronization (PAS = atrial triggered ventricular paced complexes ± total number of ventricular paced complexes) during repeated Holters. PAS was 99.99%± 0.01 % at 1 month, 99.99%± 0.02% at 3 months, and 99.98%± 0.05% at 12 months of follow-up (P = NS). No atrial oversensing with inappropriate ventricular pacing was observed, neither during isometric arm exercise testing nor spontaneously during Holier monitoring. Conclusion: The long-term stability of atrial sensing with almost 100% correct atrial synchronous tracking and the lack of inappropriate pacing due to atrial oversensing make the new Unity VDD(R) system a highly reliable single lead pacing system. In view of the lower costs and the ease of single lead implantation, this system may offer an interesting alternative to DDD pacemakers in patients with normal sinus node function.     

Age dependency of sensing performance and AV synchrony in single lead VDD pacing

Implantation of single lead VDD pacemakers is an established therapeutic option in patients with AV block and normal sinus node function. However, related to occurrence of sinus node disease and atrial undersensing, there is concern whether VDD devices are appropriate in physically active young patients. Two hundred thirty-two consecutive patients with isolated AV block and VDD pacemakers were investigated. This population was subdivided into quartiles of 58 patients according to age at time of inclusion: 26.2-59.4 years (group A), 59.5-70.1 years (group B), 70.2-81.0 years (group C), and 81.1-92.5 years (group D). Follow-up visits included pacemaker telemetry, Holter monitoring, and exercise testing. Patients were visited at 2 and 12 weeks after implantation thereafter followed by 6-month intervals. Mean follow-up period was 35 +/- 14 months. Three months after implantation, atrial sensing threshold was significantly higher in young patients: 1.18 +/- 0.58 mV (group A) versus 0.79 +/- 0.35 mV (group B), 0.68 +/- 0.33 mV (group C), and 0.60 +/- 0.25 mV (group D), P < 0.001 for comparison of group A to all other groups. Atrial undersensing was observed less frequently in young patients: 6.9% (group A) versus 17.2% (group B), 24.1% (group C), and 27.6% (group D), P = 0.025 for intergroup comparisons. Sinus node dysfunction did not occur in group A. Atrial arrhythmias and loss of AV synchronized pacing mode occurred rarely in young patients: 0.6% (0.4%) per year in group A versus 1.3% (1.3%) in group B, 3.9% (3.4%) in group C, and 5.7% (7.4%) per year in group D, P < 0.01 for intergroup comparisons. Our data show good atrial sensing performance, low incidence of sinus node dysfunction, and few atrial arrhythmias in young patients with VDD pacing for AV block. Thus, single lead VDD pacing can be recommended particularly for young patients with AV block.     

Pacemakers of the 1980s. An overview

Methods and devices for permanent cardiac pacing remained relatively stable for over two decades with use of the single-chamber ventricular demand (VVI) pacemaker. However, changes have occurred in the 1980s and are expected to continue with the availability of more advanced technology and with increasing knowledge about cardiac pacing. The physiologic benefit of the newer dual-chamber atrial synchronous (VDD) and fully automatic, universal (DDD) pacemakers over the VVI pacemaker in patients with permanent complete heart block and normal sinus node function has been established. These newer units not only reestablish atrioventricular synchrony but also are physiologically rate-responsive. The VDD pacemaker is expected to be phased out in favor of the DDD pacemaker. When the atrial rate or interval is lower than the lower rate limit, the VDD pacemaker functions as a VVI, whereas the DDD pacemaker functions as an atrioventricular sequential (DVI) pacemaker to maintain continuous atrioventricular synchrony. Contrary to general belief, patients with complete heart block and normal sinus node function may gain very little physiologic benefit, if any, from DVI pacing. The sinus node will compete with the pacemaker's atrial stimulation when the sinus rate is faster than the DVI pacemaker rate (which usually occurs during activity). Also, the ventricular pacing rate will not vary with physiologic change. The DVI and atrial demand (AAI) pacemakers have been used in some patients with sinus node dysfunction. Increasing exercise tolerance should not be expected in the majority of patients because they are not pacemaker-dependent during activity, ie, their heart rate is higher than the pacemaker rate. However, these pacemakers appear to help in eliminating pacemaker syndrome, which does not infrequently occur with VVI pacemakers. Patients with sinus node dysfunction but without atrioventricular block do not gain more physiologic benefit with a DDD than with a DVI pacemaker. Whether these patients have severe sinus node dysfunction all the time or adequate sinus node function most of the time during follow-up, the DDD pacemaker will function as a noncommitted DVI with atrial sensing (DDI). The early report of DVI pacemaker-induced atrial fibrillation during follow-up has been refuted by more recent works. If the DDD pacemaker is significantly more expensive than the DVI pacemaker, the latter type may be a good alternative for this condition.     

Intermittent Pacemaker Syndrome: Revision of VVI Pacemaker to a New Cardiac Pacing Mode for Tachy-Brady Syndrome

A patient with tachy-brady syndrome manifested by paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and symptomatic sinus bradycardia and treated by VVI pacing developed pacemaker syndrome during episodes of ventricular pacing. His cardiac pacemaker was revised to a dual chamber system utilizing the new AV sequential DDI pacing mode which eliminated pacemaker-related tachycardias and totally abolished the pacemaker syndrome symptoms. There have been no further episodes of atrial fibrillation, possibly due to elimination of temporal dispersion of refractory periods during bradycardia. The propensity for atrial fibrillation has also been minimized by excluding competitive atrial stimulation during DVI pacing. The DDI mode provides the clinician increased utility and flexibility in the use of AV sequential pacing therapy.     

Single chamber atrial pacing: a realistic option in sinus node disease: a long-term follow-up study of 213 patients

BACKGROUND: Despite several decades of experience with atrial pacing, many centers do not apply this mode to any greater extent, mainly because of concerns for the development of future atrioventricular (AV) block or atrial fibrillation. Recent studies have emphasized possible negative effects of right ventricular stimulation, even when AV-synchrony is preserved, and have thus given rise to renewed interest in single chamber atrial pacing for sinus node disease. METHODS: This study presents the results of up to 19 years' follow-up of 213 patients with sinus node disease treated with atrial pacing with respect to survival and causes of death, development of atrial fibrillation and AV block, and total mode survival. Patients were divided into two groups: with or without associated atrial tachyarrhythmias at the time of implant. Results are given for all patients and for the two groups separately. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time was 10.1 years. The survival of the entire group was lower after 10 years than that of an age and gender-matched general Swedish population. This was caused by patients with the brady-tachy syndrome (BT) having a significantly higher mortality rate than controls, whereas those with bradycardia only (B) had survival comparable to the general population. Permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) developed in 20% of patients and was significantly more common in patients with BT. The majority of patients with AF (78%) no longer needed any pacing, i.e., did not require ventricular stimulation due to slow ventricular rate. The annual incidence of high grade AV block was 1.8%. If patients with preexisting bundle branch block were excluded, the incidence was 1.6%. No fatal episode of AV block was seen. The overall mode survival at the end of follow-up was 75%, with 155 patients still with atrial pacemakers. CONCLUSION: Atrial pacing is a safe and reliable mode of pacing in patients with sinus node disease, even in the very long-term.     

Efficacy and Safety of Bipolar Sensing with High Atrial Sensitivity in Dual Chamber Pacemakers

In dual chamber pacemakers, atrial sensing performance is decisive for maintenance of AV synchrony. Particularly, the efficacy of mode switching algorithms during intermittent atrial tachyarrhythmias depends on the sensitive detection of low potential amplitudes. Therefore, a high atrial sensitivity of 0.18 mV, commonly used in single lead VDD pacemakers, was investigated for its efficacy and safety in DDD pacing. Thirty patients received dual chamber pacemakers and bipolar atrial screw‐in leads for sinus node syndrome or AV block; 15 patients suffered from intermittent atrial fibrillation. Pace makers were programmed to an atrial sensitivity of 0.18 mV. Two weeks, 3, 9, and 15 months after implantation, P wave sensing threshold and T wave oversensing thresholds for the native and paced T wave were determined. The myopotential oversensing thresholds were evaluated by isometric contraction of the pectoral muscles. Automatic mode switch to DDIR pacing was activated when the mean atrial rate exceeded 180 beats/min. The patients were followed by 24‐hour Holter monitoring. Two weeks after implantation, mean atrial sensing threshold was 1.81 ± 0.85 mV (range 0.25–2.8 mV) without significant differences during further follow‐up. Native T wave sensing threshold was < 0.18 mV in all patients. In 13% of patients, paced T waves were perceived in the atrial channel at the highest sensitivity. This T wave sensing could easily be avoided by programming a postventricular atrial refractory period exceeding 300 ms. Myopotential oversensing could not be provoked and Holter records showed no signs of sensing dysfunction. During a 15‐month follow‐up, 1,191 mode switch events were counted by autodiagnostic pacemaker function. Forty‐two of these events occurred during Holter monitoring. Unjustified mode switch was not observed. In DDD pacemakers, bipolar atrial sensing with a very high sensitivity is efficient and safe. Using these sensitivity settings, activation of the mode switch algorithm almost completely avoids fast transmission of atrial rate to the ventricle during atrial fibrillation.     

Incidence and Predictors of Loss of Pacing in the Atrium in Patients with Sick Sinus Syndrome

Atrial and dual-chamber pacemakers may be associated with reduced morbidity in patients with the sick sinus syndrome (SSS). In some patients, however, subsequent development of chronic atrial fibrillation or atrial lead failure make long-term pacing in the atrium not feasible. We analyzed the incidence and predictors of loss of atrial pacing in 395 consecutive patients with SSS (376 with dual-chamber pacemakers and 19 with single-chamber atrial pacemakers). None of them was in established atrial fibrillation at time of implant. Patients were followed-up for 55 ± 35 months. Actuarial survival of effective atrial pacing was 92.5% at 1 year, 85% at 5 years, and 76.5% at 10 years. Overall, 60 patients lost atrial pacing. The most frequent cause was the development of chronic atrial fibrillation (53 patients). By multivariate analysis (Cox proportional-hazards model), independent predictors of Joss of pacing in the atrium were preimplant episodes of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) lasting more than 1 hour (P < 0.001; hazard ratio (HR) = 4.3); prior history of PAF for more than 5 years (P < 0.001; HR = 2.67; and endocardial P wave < 2 mV (P = 0.014; HR = 1.96). In a subgroup of patients (n = 187) who had echocardiograms, a left atrium > 50 mm was also an independent predictor of loss of atrial pacing (P = 0.028; HR = 2.28). Conclusions: 1) most patients with SSS can maintain long-term atrial pacing; 2) loss of pacing in the atrium is related to the previous history of PAF, left atrial enlargement, and low amplitude of the endocardial P wave at implant; and 3) patients with these risks variables are less than ideal candidates for atrial pacing modes. In them, the implant of DDDR units might be indicated, to provide wide flexibility in case reprogramming to a ventricular pacing mode is required.     

A New Dual-Chamber Pacing Mode to Minimize Ventricular Pacing

Despite the low long-term incidence of high-degree atrioventricular (AV) block and the known negative effects of ventricular pacing, programming of the AAI mode in patients with sinus node dysfunction (SND) remains exceptional. A new pacing mode was, therefore, designed to combine the advantages of AAI with the safety of DDD pacing. AAIsafeR behaves like the AAI mode in absence of AV block. First- and second-degree AV blocks are tolerated up to a predetermined, programmable limit, and conversion to DDD takes place in case of high-degree AV block. From DDD, the device may switch back to AAI, provided AV conduction has returned. The safety of AAIsafeR was examined in 43 recipients (70 ± 12-year old, 24 men) of dual chamber pacemakers implanted for SND or paroxysmal AV block. All patients underwent 24-hour ambulatory electrocardiographic recordings before hospital discharge and at 1 month of follow-up with the AAIsafeR mode activated. No AAIsafeR-related adverse event was observed. At 1 month, the device was functioning in AAIsafeR in 28 patients (65%), and the mean rate of ventricular pacing was 0.2%± 0.4%. Appropriate switches to DDD occurred in 15 patients (35%) for frequent, unexpected AV block. AAIsafeR mode was safe and preserved ventricular function during paroxysmal AV block, while maintaining a very low rate of ventricular pacing. The performance of this new pacing mode in the prevention of atrial fibrillation will be examined in a large, controlled study.