Minimizing ventricular pacing to reduce atrial fibrillation in sinus-node disease
- PMID: 17804844
- DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa071880
Minimizing ventricular pacing to reduce atrial fibrillation in sinus-node disease
Abstract
Background: Conventional dual-chamber pacing maintains atrioventricular synchrony but results in high percentages of ventricular pacing, which causes ventricular desynchronization and has been linked to an increased risk of atrial fibrillation in patients with sinus-node disease.
Methods: We randomly assigned 1065 patients with sinus-node disease, intact atrioventricular conduction, and a normal QRS interval to receive conventional dual-chamber pacing (535 patients) or dual-chamber minimal ventricular pacing with the use of new pacemaker features designed to promote atrioventricular conduction, preserve ventricular conduction, and prevent ventricular desynchronization (530 patients). The primary end point was time to persistent atrial fibrillation.
Results: The mean (+/-SD) follow-up period was 1.7+/-1.0 years when the trial was stopped because it had met the primary end point. The median percentage of ventricular beats that were paced was lower in dual-chamber minimal ventricular pacing than in conventional dual-chamber pacing (9.1% vs. 99.0%, P<0.001), whereas the percentage of atrial beats that were paced was similar in the two groups (71.4% vs. 70.4%, P=0.96). Persistent atrial fibrillation developed in 110 patients, 68 (12.7%) in the group assigned to conventional dual-chamber pacing and 42 (7.9%) in the group assigned to dual-chamber minimal ventricular pacing. The hazard ratio for development of persistent atrial fibrillation in patients with dual-chamber minimal ventricular pacing as compared with those with conventional dual-chamber pacing was 0.60 (95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.88; P=0.009), indicating a 40% reduction in relative risk. The absolute reduction in risk was 4.8%. The mortality rate was similar in the two groups (4.9% in the group receiving dual-chamber minimal ventricular pacing vs. 5.4% in the group receiving conventional dual-chamber pacing, P=0.54).
Conclusions: Dual-chamber minimal ventricular pacing, as compared with conventional dual-chamber pacing, prevents ventricular desynchronization and moderately reduces the risk of persistent atrial fibrillation in patients with sinus-node disease. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00284830 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).
Copyright 2007 Massachusetts Medical Society.
Comment in
-
Minimizing ventricular pacing in sinus-node disease.N Engl J Med. 2007 Dec 27;357(26):2733-4; author reply 2734. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc072863. N Engl J Med. 2007. PMID: 18160697 No abstract available.
-
Does DDD pacing with minimized ventricular stimulation prevent atrial fibrillation in sinus-node disease?Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2008 Apr;5(4):190-1. doi: 10.1038/ncpcardio1125. Epub 2008 Feb 5. Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2008. PMID: 18250633 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Ventricular pacing or dual-chamber pacing for sinus-node dysfunction.N Engl J Med. 2002 Jun 13;346(24):1854-62. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa013040. N Engl J Med. 2002. PMID: 12063369 Clinical Trial.
-
The relationship between right ventricular pacing and atrial fibrillation burden and disease progression in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the long-MinVPACE study.Europace. 2011 Jun;13(6):815-20. doi: 10.1093/europace/euq463. Epub 2011 Jan 5. Europace. 2011. PMID: 21208945 Clinical Trial.
-
Ventricular pacing vs dual chamber pacing in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation after atrioventricular node ablation: open randomized study.Croat Med J. 2005 Dec;46(6):922-8. Croat Med J. 2005. PMID: 16342345 Clinical Trial.
-
[Prevention of atrial fibrillation by atrial-based pacemaker implantation].Orv Hetil. 1999 Oct 24;140(43):2393-7. Orv Hetil. 1999. PMID: 10624110 Review. Hungarian.
-
Pacing for the prevention of atrial fibrillation.Can J Cardiol. 2005 Sep;21 Suppl B:41B-44B. Can J Cardiol. 2005. PMID: 16239987
Cited by
-
Left Atrium Reverse Remodeling in Fusion CRT Pacing: Implications in Cardiac Resynchronization Response and Atrial Fibrillation Incidence.J Clin Med. 2024 Aug 15;13(16):4814. doi: 10.3390/jcm13164814. J Clin Med. 2024. PMID: 39200955 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical outcomes of conduction system pacing compared to biventricular pacing in patients with mid-range ejection fraction.J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2024 Aug 17. doi: 10.1007/s10840-024-01882-z. Online ahead of print. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2024. PMID: 39153133
-
Evaluation of ventricular pacing suppression algorithms in dual chamber pacemaker: Results of "LEADER" study.J Arrhythm. 2024 Jul 16;40(4):965-974. doi: 10.1002/joa3.13117. eCollection 2024 Aug. J Arrhythm. 2024. PMID: 39139897 Free PMC article.
-
Systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact on outcomes of device algorithms for minimizing right ventricular pacing.Europace. 2024 Aug 3;26(8):euae212. doi: 10.1093/europace/euae212. Europace. 2024. PMID: 39120658 Free PMC article.
-
Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Contributes to a Greater Acute Blood Pressure Reduction Compared to Right Ventricular Pacing.Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2023 Dec 27;24(12):372. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2412372. eCollection 2023 Dec. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2023. PMID: 39077086 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous