Literature DB >> 16765132

Long-term effects of dual-chamber pacing with periodic echocardiographic evaluation of optimal atrioventricular delay in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy >50 years of age.

Ian Topilski1, Jack Sherez, Gad Keren, Itzchak Copperman.   

Abstract

Various treatment modalities have been introduced to reduce the subaortic pressure gradient in patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, including pacemaker insertion. Complete ventricular capture during pacing is essential and requires optimization of the atrioventricular interval (AVI). In this study, a protocol using echocardiographic examination assessing the changes in the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) gradient in different AVIs, pacing rates, and pacing modes was used for optimal pacemaker programming. Twenty-five patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy were implanted with DDD pacemakers and evaluated prospectively. The LVOT gradient was measured during periodic evaluations every 3 to 6 months. Gradient measurements were done with 5 different AVIs and 3 different rate combinations. After each evaluation, the optimal AVI, pacing rate, and mode were set on the basis of the minimal LVOT gradient not associated with systolic arterial cuff pressure reduction. Follow-up ranged from 18 to 126 months. Peak LVOT gradient immediately decreased in 92% of patients. During follow-up, the optimal AVI was prolonged in most patients. Sixty-four percent of patients showed a clear relation between pacemaker modifications and gradient reduction. In 75% of these patients, optimal gradient reduction required repeated AVI and pacing rate programming on the basis of echocardiographic evaluation. Symptoms decreased in 92% of patients, and New York Heart Association class improved significantly (3.1+/-0.7 vs 1.3+/-0.4, p<0.001) during follow-up. The symptomatic reduction was positively correlated with the LVOT gradient reduction. In conclusion, DDD pacing is effective in reducing the LVOT gradient and improving functional capacity in adult patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Pacemaker programming with the periodic echocardiographic evaluation of the optimal AVI, pacing rate, and mode is imperative for optimal results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16765132     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.01.040

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  8 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Calcific embolization with infective endocarditis involving the posterior mitral leaflet in a patient with underlying hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy.

Authors:  Navneet Lather; Kyle Niziolek; Peter Toth; David M Harris
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 2.300

3.  Comparison of long-term effect of dual-chamber pacing and alcohol septal ablation in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy.

Authors:  Jan Krejci; Pavel Gregor; David Zemanek; Klaudia Vyskocilova; Karol Curila; Radka Stepanova; Miroslav Novak; Ladislav Groch; Josef Veselka
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2013-11-11

4.  2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing.

Authors:  Bruce L Wilkoff; Laurent Fauchier; Martin K Stiles; Carlos A Morillo; Sana M Al-Khatib; Jesœs Almendral; Luis Aguinaga; Ronald D Berger; Alejandro Cuesta; James P Daubert; Sergio Dubner; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; N A Mark Estes; Guilherme Fenelon; Fermin C Garcia; Maurizio Gasparini; David E Haines; Jeff S Healey; Jodie L Hurtwitz; Roberto Keegan; Christof Kolb; Karl-Heinz Kuck; Germanas Marinskis; Martino Martinelli; Mark McGuire; Luis G Molina; Ken Okumura; Alessandro Proclemer; Andrea M Russo; Jagmeet P Singh; Charles D Swerdlow; Wee Siong Teo; William Uribe; Sami Viskin; Chun-Chieh Wang; Shu Zhang
Journal:  J Arrhythm       Date:  2016-02-01

Review 5.  Cardiac pacing in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy.

Authors:  José Maria Tolosana; Emilce Trucco
Journal:  Glob Cardiol Sci Pract       Date:  2018-08-12

6.  Right ventricular pacing for hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy: meta-analysis and meta-regression of clinical trials.

Authors:  Ahran D Arnold; James P Howard; Kayla Chiew; William J Kerrigan; Felicity de Vere; Hannah T Johns; Leonid Churlilov; Yousif Ahmad; Daniel Keene; Matthew J Shun-Shin; Graham D Cole; Prapa Kanagaratnam; S M Afzal Sohaib; Amanda Varnava; Darrel P Francis; Zachary I Whinnett
Journal:  Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes       Date:  2019-10-01

7.  Ventricular arrhythmia management in patients with genetic cardiomyopathies.

Authors:  Zain I Sharif; Steven A Lubitz
Journal:  Heart Rhythm O2       Date:  2021-12-17

Review 8.  Deciphering hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with electrocardiography.

Authors:  Thomas Gossios; Konstantinos Savvatis; Thomas Zegkos; Dimitrios Ntelios; Pavlos Rouskas; Despoina Parcharidou; Haralambos Karvounis; Georgios K Efthimiadis
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 4.654

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.