DDIR Versus VVIR Pacing in Patients with Paroxysmal Atrial Tachyarrhythmias

Patients with sinus node dysfunction (SND) in particular those with tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome and patients undergoing atrioventricular nodal ablation procedures for refractory paroxysmal atrial tachyarrhythmias (PAT), are candidates for single chamber (VVIR mode) or dual chamber rate responsive (DDIR mode) systems. To evaluate the benefits and disadvantages of each pacing mode we retrospectively analyzed 33 patients with a history of frequent PAT who received a VVIR (22 patients); or a DDDR pacemaker (11 patients) programmed to the DDIR mode. The mean follow-up time was 25 and 18 months, respectively. Preimplant left atrial diameter was significantly smaller in the DDIR group. Chronic atrial fibrillation developed in 54% of the VVIR patients and 27% of the DDIR group, but this difference was not significant. Complications of patients with VVIR pacemakers included new mitral and tricuspid insufficiency, stroke, pacemaker inlolerance and aggravated congestive heart failure. Patients with DDIR pacemakers had a lower incidence of symptoms and complications. However, this group received more antiarrhythmic medication, required a closer follow-up, and their pacemakers needed frequent reprogramming. Our findings suggest that VVIR is a poor choice for patients with SND, congestive heart failure, and PAT, and that DDIR may be an acceptable alternative.