Atrial Sensing and AV Synchrony in Single Lead VDD Pacemakers: A Prospective Comparison to DDD Devices with Bipolar Atrial Leads

INTRODUCTION: Single lead VDD pacing has offered an alternative to DDD systems in patients with isolated AV block. Up to now, however, the relative performance of these pacemaker systems was not systematically compared. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three hundred sixty patients who received either a VDD pacemaker (n = 180) or a DDD device (n = 180) with a bipolar atrial lead were investigated prospectively for a mean period of 30 +/- 13 months. Pacemaker function was analyzed by telemetry, Holter monitoring, and exercise ECG. Time of implantation and fluoroscopy was significantly lower with VDD devices (44.3 +/- 5.1 min vs 74.4 +/- 13.5 min and 4.6 +/- 2.5 min vs 10.3 +/- 5.6 min in DDD pacemakers, respectively). Intermittent atrial undersensing occurred in 23.3% of patients with a VDD pacemaker and in 9.4% with DDD devices (NS). The incidence of atrial tachyarrhythmias did not differ between the VDD (6.7%) and the DDD group (6.1%). Sinus node dysfunction developed in 1.9% of patients, but the vast majority (85.7%) of patients were asymptomatic. There was a tendency for a higher rate of operative revisions in the DDD group (6.1% vs 3.3% in VDD pacemakers, P = 0.15). Cumulative maintenance of AV-synchronized pacing mode was 94.9% in patients with VDD pacemakers and 92.1% with DDD devices (NS). CONCLUSION: With the benefit of a simpler implant procedure, long-term outcome of single lead VDD pacing is equivalent to DDD pacing in patients with AV block and preoperative normal sinus node function.     

Single-lead VDD-pacing system incorporating high impedance stimulation: a multicentre study.

AIM: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of a new VDD pacing system incorporating a high impedance, single-pass VDD lead. The new lead is a bipolar, steroid-eluting, high impedance lead with a full-ring atrial dipole. METHODS AND RESULTS: The system was implanted in 46 patients with high degree atrioventricular (AV) block. Patients were followed at pre-discharge, 6 weeks, and 3 months. The mean measured P-wave amplitude was stable, with values between 1.18 and 1.43 mV. Atrial sensing was reliable during short-term evaluation at rest and in the sitting position, with AV-synchronous stimulation between 98.79 +/- 6.90% and 99.73 +/- 1.47%. Holter recordings after 6 weeks demonstrated AV-synchronous stimulation in 99.57 1.03% of all P-waves. Lead impedance was stable during follow-up, with mean values between 1000 and 1167 Q. Mean ventricular pacing thresholds (at 0.5 ms) were 0.47 V at implant, 0.49 V at pre-discharge, 0.74 V at 6 weeks, and 0.72 V at 3 months. R-wave amplitude remained stable between 14.9 and 16.7 mV during follow-up. CONCLUSION: This new single-pass VDD lead system provided reliable atrial sensing and stable high impedance stimulation during a 3-month follow-up period.     

Single-pass lead VDD pacing system in children and adolescents: report of twenty-four patients

The dual-chamber pacing systems allow for AV synchrony, but generally require the placement of two separate transvenous leads. Single-lead atrioventricular synchronous pacing system (VDD) using single-pass leads has been accepted as therapeutic alternative for atrioventricular block with normal sinus node function. The aim of this study is to evaluate clinical performance of single-pass lead VDD pacing systems in 24 consecutive patients in a ten-year period. The study group includes 17 (70.8%) male and 7 (28.8%) female patients.The mean age and mean weight during pacemaker implantation was 10.4 +/- 3.8 years (4-17 years) and 30 +/- I I kg (13.5-55 kg), respectively. The patients have been followed for 7-84 months (median 42 months). The percentage of atrial sensing-ventricular pacing changed from 75 to 99.9% at the last control. During the follow-up period, pacing mode was changed to VVIR due to complete loss of AV synchrony in five patients (21%). Four of them had underlying cardiac disease. In these patients loss of AV synchrony might be related to cardiac enlargement/abnormal cardiac anatomy or small atrial dipole-ventricular tip length. Despite the loss of AV synchrony in post surgical AV block or dilated cardiomyopathy, single-lead VDD pacing systems can be successfully used in children with complete AV block and normal sinus node function. Patients and lead selection should be taken into consideration for the maintenance of AV synchrony.     

Long-term performance of single-pass physiological pacing.

BACKGROUND: Single-pass physiological pacing has several advantages over dual-lead physiological pacing. The present study evaluated the long-term performance of single-pass pacing using the overlapping biphasic impulse stimulation technique. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 30 patients with single-pass VDD pacing and 8 patients with single-pass DDDC pacing were followed up for 1 year by basal and magnet electrocardiograms and real-time telemetry. All the patients showed satisfactory atrial sensing and pacing capture threshold. The atrial sensing thresholds at implant and at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months of follow-up were 2.5+/-0.67 mV, 1.6+/-0.6 mV, 1.1+/-0.5 mV, 1.0+/-0.5 mV and 1.0+/-0.04 mV, respectively. The corresponding values for atrial pacing threshold at a pulse wave of 0.5 ms were 2.5+/-1.0 V, 4.4+/-0.9 V, 3.8+/-1.2 V, 3.6+/-1.4 V and 3.8+/-1.4 V. Of the patients with DDDC pacing, 88% showed stable pacing capture in the supine position, 75% in the upright position and 62% in both positions. Diaphragmatic contraction was seen in 25% of cases with DDDC pacing. No such event was seen in patients with VDD pacing. CONCLUSIONS: Single-pass pacing is safe, technically easy and cheap as compared to dual-lead systems. However, it would be prudent to recommend DDDC pacing in patients who require predominantly VDD pacing and only occasionally atrial pacing, as the latter showed a low percentage of stable atrial pacing capture in both upright and supine positions as well as a significant percentage of diaphragmatic contraction.     

DDD and single-lead VDD pacing: evaluation of atrial signal dynamic changes

BACKGROUND: Single-lead VDD pacing systems are an alternative to conventional DDD pacemakers in patients with atrioventricular (AV) block and normal sinus function. HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to assess changes of P-wave amplitude occurring in dynamic conditions in two groups of patients with a single-lead VDD and with a DDD pacing system, respectively. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with second- or third-degree AV block and normal sinus function were enrolled prospectively into the study. Seventeen patients were implanted with a single-lead VDD pacing system and 11 with a DDD pacemaker. Patients were evaluated at 3 months (all patients) and at 6 months (26 patients) at supine and in dynamic conditions (postural changes, hyperventilation, and during exercise). RESULTS: Mean P-wave values at supine were 1.92 +/- 1.10 mV at 3 months and 1.76 +/- 1.01 mV at 6 months for VDD systems, and 4.63 +/- 2.18 mV at 3 months and 4.58 +/- 2.80 mV at 6 months for DDD pacemakers. In dynamic conditions, P-wave amplitude changes compared with supine condition ranged between -74 and +226% in VDD, and between -53 and +138% in DDD; however P-wave amplitudes showed no significant changes compared with baseline. Moreover, changes in atrial signal amplitudes did not occur randomly, and in both systems P-wave amplitudes remained significantly correlated with supine values. CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of P-wave amplitude variations occurs in different postural conditions or during exercise, both with single-lead VDD and DDD pacing systems. However, with appropriate programming of atrial sensitivity based on supine values, constant atrial tracking can be maintained.     

Atrial tracking (synchronous) pacing in a pediatric and young adult population

One hundred pediatric and young adult patients underwent implantation of an atrial tracking pacemaker. Seventy-four pacemakers paced in an atrioventricular (AV) sequential mode at the lower rate limit (DDD) while 26 paced in a ventricular demand mode at the lower rate limit (VDD). Five patients required reoperation during follow-up of 1 month to 2.5 years (mean 1.5 years). Six additional patients required programming to ventricular demand (3) or AV sequential (3) pacing, because of development of sinus bradycardia (2), atrial sensing problems (1) or pacemaker-mediated tachycardia (3). Pulse generators that could sense atrial signals less than 1.0 mV and had a programmable atrial refractory period did not require reprogramming out of the atrial tracking mode. No patient developed atrial flutter or fibrillation. Sensing problems during exercise occurred in 37% of the first 60 pacemakers but in none of the last 40, which had improved electronic components. Atrial tracking pacing is feasible in pediatric and young adult patients.     

Cost-effectiveness of dual-chamber pacemaker therapy: does single lead VDD pacing reduce treatment costs of atrioventricular block?

AIMS: Implantation of single-lead VDD pacemakers is an established alternative to DDD pacing in patients with atrioventricular block. This study compares the long-term costs of both systems. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty patients with atrioventricular block received VDD or DDD pacemakers in alternating order. Primary costs of implantation included: devices, leads and operation material, surgeons, nurses, medical technicians, and hospitalization. The mean cost of an uncomplicated DDD pacemaker implantation was defined as 1000 virtual cost-units (CU). Costs of pacemaker related complications or re-operations as well as upgrades from VDD to DDD devices were considered secondary costs and assessed during a mean follow-up period of 42+/-15 months. Pacing efficacy was assessed by event-free survival with maintained atrioventricular synchronized pacing mode. Costs of pacemaker devices were not different (639+/-26 CU in VDD vs 641+/-32 CU in DDD, ns). However, due to lower costs of lead hardware (102+/-10 CU in VDD vs 133+/-14 CU in DDD, P<0.001) and shorter implantation procedures (44.3+/-5.1 min vs 74.4+/-13.5 min, P<0.001), costs of an uncomplicated implantation were 8.9% lower in the VDD group (911+/-35 CU vs 1000+/-39 CU, P<0.001). A smaller complication rate in the VDD group led to a 16.1% reduction of secondary costs (26+/-17 CU year(-1)vs 31+/- 25 CU year(-1), P=0.024). Event-free survival did not differ between groups (83.4% in VDD vs 84.9% in DDD, ns). CONCLUSION: Use of single-lead VDD pacemakers achieves significant reduction of implantation and follow-up costs without loss of therapeutic efficacy compared to conventional DDD systems.     

Safety and effectiveness of single-lead VDD pacing

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Single-lead VDD pacing provides the physiological benefits of atrioventricular synchrony with the convenience of a single-lead system. However, concern remains about the method's safety and effectiveness. METHOD: In total, 700 patients with single-lead VDD pacemakers were evaluated retrospectively. The following parameters were recorded: age, sex, etiology, the symptoms and electrocardiographic diagnosis that justified pacemaker implantation, the venous access route used for implantation, atrial sensing at implantation, atrial undersensing at follow-up, the occurrence of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias, and final pacing mode. RESULTS: Third-degree atrioventricular block was the main indication for pacemaker implantation (66.4%). The most commonly used venous access route was via the right cephalic vein (49.1%). At implantation, the mean atrial signal was 1.8 (4 1.15) mV. During follow-up, significant atrial undersensing occurred in 7.7% of patients; in 1.9%, it could not be corrected by device reprogramming. Uncontrollable supraventricular arrhythmias were observed in 6.4% of patients. Symptomatic sinus node disease was rare. By the end of follow-up, 91.4% of patients were still on VDD pacing, while, in 8.3%, the pacemaker had to be reprogrammed to the VVI mode. Only 0.3% required atrial lead implantation for DDD pacing. Left-side venous access during implantation was a independent predictora of atrial undersensing at follow-up. Low values of atrial detection at implant did not reach statistical signification although it showed a remarkable trend. CONCLUSIONS: Single-lead VDD pacing seems to be safe and effective when appropriately indicated. Our findings are consistent with those of previously published studies.     

Right atrial pacing impairs cardiac function during resynchronization therapy: acute effects of DDD pacing compared to VDD pacing

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the hemodynamic effects of right-atrial-paced (DDD) and right-atrial-sensed (VDD) biventricular paced rhythm on cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy improves hemodynamics in patients with severe heart failure and left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony. However, the impact of active right atrial pacing on resynchronization therapy is unknown. METHODS: Seventeen CRT patients were studied 10 months (range: 1 to 46 months) after implantation. At baseline, the programmed atrioventricular delay was optimized by timing LV contraction properly at the end of atrial contraction. In both modes the acute hemodynamic effects were assessed by multiple Doppler echocardiographic parameters. RESULTS: Compared to DDD pacing, VDD pacing resulted in much better improvement of intraventricular dyssynchrony assessed by the septal-to-posterior wall motion delay (VDD 106 +/- 83 ms vs. DDD 145 +/- 95 ms; p = 0.001), whereas the interventricular mechanical delay (difference between onset of pulmonary and aortic outflow) did not differ (VDD 20 +/- 21 ms vs. DDD 18 +/- 17 ms; p = NS). Furthermore, VDD pacing significantly prolonged the rate-corrected LV filling period (VDD 458 +/- 123 ms vs. DDD 371 +/- 94 ms; p = 0.0001) and improved the myocardial performance index (VDD 0.60 +/- 0.18 vs. DDD 0.71 +/- 0.23; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that avoidance of right atrial pacing results in a higher degree of LV resynchronization, in a substantial prolongation of the LV filling period, and in an improved myocardial performance. Thus, the VDD mode seems to be superior to the DDD mode in CRT patients.     

Single-chamber ventricular pacing increases markers of left ventricular dysfunction compared with dual-chamber pacing.

AIMS: Large randomized trials comparing DDD with VVI pacing have shown no differences in mortality, but conflicting evidence exists in regard to heart failure endpoints. Here we evaluated the effect of pacing mode on serum levels of brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and amino-terminal-proBNP (NT-proBNP). Methods Forty-one patients (age 73 +/- 10 years) with dual-chamber pacemakers were included in a prospective, single-blind, randomized crossover study evaluating the impact of DDD(R)/VDD versus VVI(R) mode on objective and functional parameters. Data were collected after a 2-week run-in phase and after 2 weeks each of VVI(R) and DDD(R)/VDD pacing or vice versa. Results BNP and NT-proBNP levels during DDD(R)/VDD stimulation (151 +/- 131 and 547 +/- 598 pg/mL) showed no change compared with baseline (154 +/- 130 and 565 +/- 555 pg/mL), but a significant 2.4-fold increase was observed during VVI(R) mode [360 +/- 221 and 1298 +/- 1032 pg/mL; P < 0.001 compared with DDD(R)/VDD]. The assessment of functional class, the presence of pacemaker syndrome [49% in VVI(R) mode] and the patients' preferred pacing mode showed significant differences in favour of DDD(R)/VDD pacing. CONCLUSION: Patients can differentiate between DDD(R)/VDD and VVI(R) pacing, and prefer the former. Compared with DDD(R)/VDD pacing, VVI(R) stimulation induces a two- to three-fold increase in serum BNP and NT-proBNP levels.     

Hemodynamic comparison of ventricular pacing, atrioventricular sequential pacing, and atrial synchronous ventricular pacing using radionuclide ventriculography

To assess the hemodynamic effects of physiologic pacing, 13 patients with DDD pacemakers who had varying degrees of atrioventricular (AV) block were studied with radionuclide ventriculography during VVI, DVI and VDD modes. Radionuclide ventriculography was performed with patient in the supine position at rest 5 to 10 minutes after the pacing mode and AV delay were changed. The AV delays selected were short (mean 147 +/- 4.8 ms) and long (mean 197 +/- 4.8 ms), with a constant difference of 50 ms. During VVI, 6 patients (group 1) had a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less (mean 22 +/- 11) and 7 patients (group 2) had an ejection fraction of more than 40% (mean 59 +/- 11). Comparisons of ejection fraction, end-diastolic volume and cardiac index between VVI and both modes of AV pacing (VDD and DVI) and between long and short AV delays led to the following conclusions: DVI or VDD pacing produces more beneficial hemodynamic effects than VVI, and these effects are more pronounced in patients with low ejection fraction if longer AV delay is used. The VDD mode significantly improves ventricular function over the DVI mode in patients with an ejection fraction of more than 40% independent of heart rate. Longer AV delay is essential in patients with an ejection fraction of 40% or less to improve ventricular function with physiologic pacing.     

Permanent cardiac pacing in patients with the long QT syndrome

A permanent pacemaker was inserted in eight patients with the long QT syndrome. All had recurrent syncope or seizures, six had documented torsade de pointes and four had aborted sudden death. Among the eight patients, permanent pacing was instituted in three who were unsuccessfully treated with both a beta-adrenergic blocking agent and left cardiothoracic sympathectomy, and in two who proved refractory or intolerant to beta-blockers. Another three patients had pacemaker implantation and long-term beta-blocker therapy because of spontaneous atrioventricular (AV) block in one, aborted sudden death in one and patient preference in one. After pacing (70 to 85 beats/min), there was no significant change in the mean corrected QT interval, but the mean QT interval decreased significantly (534.4 +/- 51.4 to 425.6 +/- 18.9 ms, p less than 0.0001). Over a mean follow-up period of 35.1 +/- 18.9 months, all patients are alive and currently free of syncope. One patient without a history of stress-induced syncope had two syncopal episodes (believed to be due to hyperventilation) while under severe emotional stress, but has been symptom free for the past 5 years. One patient with an atrial demand (AAI) pacemaker developed dizziness due to documented episodes of AV block, but remains asymptomatic after conversion to atrial rate-responsive dual chamber (DDD) pacing. Either atrial or ventricular pacing combined with beta-blocker therapy appears to be effective treatment for a subset of patients with the long QT syndrome, by either preventing episodes of torsade de pointes or alleviating symptoms due to bradycardia from beta-blocker therapy.     

单根电极VDD起搏器的初步应用（附七例报告）

自１９９４年１～１０月共为７例（完全性房室传导阻滞６例、高度房室传导阻滞１例）病人应用了单电极ＶＤＤ起搏器。术后随诊３～１２（平均６．５±２．５）个月，动态心电图监测全部达到心房同步起搏的目的，其中１例有个别间断性Ｐ波感知差而自动转为ＶＶＩ起搏，但总的Ｐ波感知率在９８％以上。如植入病例经严格选择（窦房功能正常的房室传导阻滞），单电极ＶＤＤ起搏可代替双腔ＤＤＤ起搏。     

Development of sinus node disease in patients with AV block: implications for single lead VDD pacing

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the incidence of sinus node disease after pacemaker implantation for exclusive atrioventricular (AV) block. DESIGN: 441 patients were followed after VDD (n = 219) or DDD pacemaker (n = 222) implantation for AV block over a mean period of 37 months. Sinus node disease and atrial arrhythmias had been excluded by Holter monitoring and treadmill exercise preoperatively in 286 patients (group A). In 155 patients with complete AV block, a sinus rate above 70 beats/min was required for inclusion in the study (group B). Holter monitoring and treadmill exercise were performed two weeks, three months, and every six months after implantation. Sinus bradycardia below 40 beats/min, sinoatrial block, sinus arrest, or subnormal increase of heart rate during treadmill exercise were defined as sinus node dysfunction. RESULTS: Cumulative incidence of sinus node disease was 0.65% per year without differences between groups. Clinical indicators of sinus node dysfunction were sinus bradycardia below 40 beats/min in six patients (1.4%), intermittent sinoatrial block in two (0.5%), and chronotropic incompetence in five patients (1.1%). Only one of these patients (0.2%) was symptomatic. Cumulative incidence of atrial fibrillation was 2.0% per year, independent of the method used for the assessment of sinus node function and of the implanted device. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing pacemaker implantation for isolated AV block, sinus node syndrome rarely occurs during follow up. Thus single lead VDD pacing can safely be performed in these patients.     

Acute Evaluation of a Preformed Single-pass VDD/DDD Pacing Lead

The clinical utility of single lead, atrial synchronous, ventricular pacing (VDD), for patients with normal sinus function and heart block is well established. Atrial stimulation, unavailable in VDD systems presents a significant disadvantage. DDD pacing systems however, require the introduction and positioning of two separate leads. The acute human study discussed evaluated a modified version of a commercially available VDD lead with a preshaped lobe, capable of both sensing and pacing the right atrium. P waves and atrial stimulation thresholds were determined in five patients. The mean P-wave was 2.5 ± 1 millivolts. Atrial stimulation in the unipolar configuration was 1.6 ± 0.5 volts and 1.7 ± 0.9 volts in the bipolar configuration. These acute stimulation thresholds and sensing amplitudes were comparable to conventional DDD pacing systems. Therefore, single-lead DDD pacing may be feasible and warrants further study.     

Predictors of loss of atrioventricular synchrony in single lead VDD pacing

Objective—To evaluate maintenance of proper VDD function, defined as persistence of sinus rhythm with atrial synchronous ventricular pacing, and to define factors predicting failure of the VDD mode in patients with atrioventricular (AV) block and normal sinus function.
Design—Observational study in 86 consecutive patients (mean (SD) age 74 (12) years; 38 women, 48 men) with single lead VDD pacing systems (Intermedics Unity, n = 66, Medtronic Thera VDD, n = 20), implanted for high degree AV block with documented normal sinus node. Pacemaker function was assessed by event counters, telemetric measurements, and Holter recordings. Demographic, radiological, and pacing variables were correlated with loss of proper VDD function.
Results—During a mean (SD) follow up of 10 (10) months (range 1-37), sinus rhythm and atrial triggered ventricular pacing were maintained in 70 of 86 patients (81%). Atrial undersensing was observed in nine patients, lead migration in two, atrial fibrillation in three, and symptomatic sinus bradycardia in two. Univariate predictors of loss of proper VDD function were: low position of the atrial dipole relative to the carina ( 6 cm; p < 0.01) during fluoroscopy; and maximum programmable atrial sensitivity of the pacemaker (p = 0.03). In a multivariate analysis, only dipole position remained predictive of outcome (p < 0.02). Not predictive were sex, age, symptoms before pacemaker implantation, cardiothoracic ratio or dilatation of individual heart chambers on chest x ray, side of device implant, and P wave amplitude at implant.
Conclusions—To maintain proper VDD function in the long term, a low anatomical dipole position relative to the carina should be avoided. Electrical guidance of dipole positioning does not seem to influence long term outcome.

Keywords: VDD pacing;  atrioventricular synchrony;  arrhythmias     

房室顺序起搏系统A波振幅测量值的观察研究

观察术后平静呼吸时体位变化对房室顺序起搏系统A波振幅测量值的影响 ,并与术中测量值进行比较。安装DDD或VDD起搏器的患者 2 8例 (DDD 17例、VDD 11例 ) ,自主窦性心率大于 30次 /分 ,均无心房颤动或房性早搏。术后 7天采用起搏器程控仪BiotronikSWM 10 0 0的自动P/R波感知测试功能 ,分别测试患者平静呼吸状态下坐、卧位 12s的A波振幅 ,并与术中测量值进行比较。结果 :平静呼吸状态下DDD和VDD组的A波振幅测量值变化均较大 ;VDD型起搏器A波振幅测量值在坐、卧位有显著性差异 (P =0 .0 2 )。结论 :房室顺序起搏系统A波振幅测量值是一个易受呼吸、体位、术后时间等因素影响的参数 ,临床设定起搏器感知灵敏度时应动态了解A波振幅大小 ,及时调整感知参数 ,以保证有效安全的房室顺序起搏     

Long-term clinical performance of AAI pacing in patients with sick sinus syndrome: a comparison with dual-chamber pacing.

AIMS: In this clinical study, we compared two groups of age-matched patients, AAI and DDD, to evaluate the clinical benefits of AAI pacing in patients with sick sinus syndrome (SSS) and normal atrioventricular (AV) conduction. METHODS AND RESULTS: Ninety-five patients with SSS implanted with AAI pacemakers were compared with 101 SSS patients implanted with DDD pacemakers. Mortality, chronic atrial fibrillation, lead survival rates, and reoperation rates were compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Eight AAI devices were switched to DDD due to high-degree (grade 2-3) AV block. The incidence of high-degree AV block was 1.104%/year, with a freedom rate of 88.6% at 10 years. There were no significant differences between the two groups in survival rates (87.8% in AAI vs. 93.4% in DDD at 10 years), freedom from atrial fibrillation (93.6% vs. 90.6%), or freedom from reoperation (71.3% vs. 76.3%). On the other hand, lead failure was twice as frequent in the DDD group than in the AAI group (relative risk=2.045, P=0.0382). CONCLUSION: AAI pacing, a simple system using a single lead and single-chamber pacemaker, can achieve a clinical outcome similar to that of the DDD mode in patients with SSS and normal AV conduction.     

Upgrade to dual chamber pacing after long-term ventricular stimulation: feasibility and intermediate term follow-up.

AIMS: To evaluate the feasibility and follow-up results of atrial lead implantation and a change to dual chamber pacing following long-term treatment with single chamber ventricular stimulation. METHODS AND RESULTS: During a 30-month period, 70 consecutive patients with ventricular pacemakers were referred for pulse generator exchange or lead reoperation. Using defined criteria, an upgrade procedure was considered indicated in 34 of the cases (49%); these patients had a mean age of 74.8+/-8.8 years, and had been treated with VVI or VVIR pacing for a mean time of 7.8+/-3.8 years (range 1.8-17). An atrial lead was successfully implanted via ipsilateral subclavian venipuncture through the existing pectoral pacemaker pocket in 33 of the 34 cases (97% of the attempts). Postoperatively, one atrial lead dislodgement was seen, and another patient required atrial lead adjustment due to P wave undersensing. The mean follow-up period was 14+/-10 months. During this time, four patients developed permanent atrial fibrillation (annual incidence 11%. In 82% of the patients in whom an upgrade procedure was attempted, dual chamber pacing was maintained at the end of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Restoration of AV synchrony is possible in a substantial proportion of patients treated with long-term ventricular stimulation. Atrial lead placement through ipsilateral subclavian venipuncture is generally feasible, and the vast majority of cases remain in dual chamber pacing with normal function during intermediate term follow-up.     

Atrial pacing for prevention of atrial fibrillation: assessment of simultaneously implemented algorithms.

AIMS: Several preliminary studies indicated that right atrial pacing could prevent atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATA). We sought to compare the safety and the efficacy of atrial-based pacing supplemented by dedicated combined algorithms with conventional atrial pacing in the prevention of ATA. METHODS: Fifty-five patients with a history of recurrent paroxysmal ATA implanted with a dual-chamber pacemaker were studied during two randomized cross-over pacing periods (conventional DDD and DDD with ATA prevention algorithms) of 6 months duration. The primary endpoint was the burden of ATA episodes recorded by the device mode switch algorithm. RESULTS: The cross-over analysis did not demonstrate any significant difference between the two pacing modes: 254+/-533 h of ATA during the control period versus 238+/-518 h during the ATA prevention period. Analysis of a subgroup of patients found that those with the lower percentage of ventricular pacing benefited from ATA prevention algorithms (120+/-182 h versus 225+/-350 h during the control period; P < 0.04). CONCLUSION: When compared with DDD pacing at 70 bpm, ATA prevention algorithms have not demonstrated significant efficacy. However, a subgroup of patients with preserved native AV conduction (low percentage of ventricular pacing) responded to ATA prevention algorithms.