Literature DB >> 10359738

Assessment of permanent dual-chamber pacing as a treatment for drug-refractory symptomatic patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. A randomized, double-blind, crossover study (M-PATHY).

B J Maron1, R A Nishimura, W J McKenna, H Rakowski, M E Josephson, R S Kieval.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Dual-chamber pacing (DDD) has been proposed as a treatment alternative to surgery for severely symptomatic patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), based largely on uncontrolled studies. METHODS AND
RESULTS: This prospective, multicenter trial assessed pacing in 48 symptomatic HCM patients with >/=50 mm Hg basal gradient, refractory to drug therapy. Patients were randomized to 3 months each of DDD pacing and pacing backup (AAI-30) in a double-blind, crossover study design, followed by an uncontrolled and unblinded 6-month pacing trial. With randomization, no significant differences were evident between pacing and no pacing for subjective or objective measures of symptoms or exercise capacity, including NYHA functional class, quality of life score, treadmill exercise time or peak oxygen consumption. After 6 additional months of unblinded pacing, functional class and quality of life score were improved compared with baseline (P<0.01), but peak oxygen consumption was unchanged. Outflow gradient decreased 40%, 82+/-32 mm Hg to 48+/-32 mm Hg (P<0. 001), and was reduced in 57% of patients but showed no change or an increase in 43%. At 12 months, 6 individual patients (12%) showed improved functional capacity; each was 65 to 75 years of age. Left ventricular wall thicknesses in the overall study group showed no remodeling between baseline (22+/-5 mm) and 12 months (21+/-5 mm; P=NS).
CONCLUSIONS: (1) Pacing cannot be regarded as a primary treatment for obstructive HCM; (2) with randomization, perceived symptomatic improvement was most consistent with a substantial placebo effect; (3) longer, uncontrolled pacing periods were associated with some subjective benefit but unaccompanied by objective improvement in cardiovascular performance and should be interpreted cautiously; (4) modest reduction in outflow gradient was achieved in most patients; and (5) a small subset (12%) >/= 65 years of age showed a clinical response, suggesting that DDD pacing could be a therapeutic option for some elderly patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10359738     DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.99.22.2927

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  59 in total

Review 1.  Should all candidates for ICD therapy receive a dual chamber system?

Authors:  W Jung; B Lüderitz
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 1.900

2.  [Transcoronary ablation of septal hypertrophy (TASH): supersedes it the surgery (myectomy)?].

Authors:  H Kuhn; F Gietzen
Journal:  Herz       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 3.  Permanent pacing: new indications.

Authors:  M R Gold
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 4.  Analysis of dual-chamber pacing as a treatment for refractory limiting symptoms in patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

Authors:  B J Maron
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 5.  Emerging indications for permanent pacing.

Authors:  D L Wolbrette; G V Naccarelli
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 2.931

6.  Unmasking the truth.

Authors:  D Cullington; S Esmail; S Hurren; J G F Cleland; A L Clark; M F Alamgir
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2011-01-12

Review 7.  Pacing for drug-refractory or drug-intolerant hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

Authors:  Mohammed Qintar; Abdulrahman Morad; Hazem Alhawasli; Khaled Shorbaji; Belal Firwana; Adib Essali; Waleed Kadro
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-05-16

8.  Rationale and design of the TRICHAMPION trial: Triple Chamber Pacing in Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy Patients.

Authors:  Antonio Berruezo; Markus Linhart; Angelo Auricchio; José Luis Zamorano; Pilar Santamaria; Roger Borràs; Felip Burgos; Josep Brugada
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2018-02-03       Impact factor: 1.900

Review 9.  Management of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in children.

Authors:  Hubert Seggewiss; Angelos Rigopoulos
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 3.022

10.  Therapeutic options in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a pediatric perspective.

Authors:  Edward K Rhee; John J Nigro; Stephen G Pophal
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2008-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.