BACKGROUND: Atrial overdrive pacing algorithms may be effective in preventing or suppressing atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the maintenance of a heart rate incessantly faster than spontaneous could induce left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and promote heart failure (HF) on the long term. OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis examined the effects of a new overdrive algorithm on the incidence of HF-related adverse events in 411 patients enrolled in the ADOPT-A trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The AF Suppression algorithm was randomly programmed ON in 209 patients (treatment group) versus OFF in 202 patients (control group). The incidence of HF-related adverse events and HF-related deaths over a 6-month follow-up was compared between the two groups. Patients with versus without HF-related clinical events were also compared to each other within each group. RESULTS: There were eight HF-related adverse clinical events (3.8%) in the treatment group and 11 (5.4%) in the control group, including four HF-related deaths (1.9 vs. 2.0%) in each group during follow-up. Baseline NYHA functional class in patients with versus without HF-related adverse events was 1.4 +/- 0.5 versus 1.5 +/- 0.7 in the control, and 1.5 +/- 0.8 versus 1.5 +/- 0.6 in the treatment group. LV ejection fraction (EF) was 49 +/- 7% in patients with, versus 57 +/- 12% in patients without HF-related adverse events, in the control group, and 43 +/- 14% in patients with, versus 56 +/- 13% in patients without HF-related adverse events, in the treatment group. LVEF was lowest and similar in both groups among patients who died from HF (35 +/- 10% in the control and 38 +/- 27% in the treatment group). CONCLUSIONS: In ADOPT-A, HF-related clinical events and deaths were related to LV dysfunction and not to atrial pacing overdriven by the AF suppression algorithm.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Atrial overdrive pacing algorithms may be effective in preventing or suppressing atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the maintenance of a heart rate incessantly faster than spontaneous could induce left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and promote heart failure (HF) on the long term. OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis examined the effects of a new overdrive algorithm on the incidence of HF-related adverse events in 411 patients enrolled in the ADOPT-A trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The AF Suppression algorithm was randomly programmed ON in 209 patients (treatment group) versus OFF in 202 patients (control group). The incidence of HF-related adverse events and HF-related deaths over a 6-month follow-up was compared between the two groups. Patients with versus without HF-related clinical events were also compared to each other within each group. RESULTS: There were eight HF-related adverse clinical events (3.8%) in the treatment group and 11 (5.4%) in the control group, including four HF-related deaths (1.9 vs. 2.0%) in each group during follow-up. Baseline NYHA functional class in patients with versus without HF-related adverse events was 1.4 +/- 0.5 versus 1.5 +/- 0.7 in the control, and 1.5 +/- 0.8 versus 1.5 +/- 0.6 in the treatment group. LV ejection fraction (EF) was 49 +/- 7% in patients with, versus 57 +/- 12% in patients without HF-related adverse events, in the control group, and 43 +/- 14% in patients with, versus 56 +/- 13% in patients without HF-related adverse events, in the treatment group. LVEF was lowest and similar in both groups among patients who died from HF (35 +/- 10% in the control and 38 +/- 27% in the treatment group). CONCLUSIONS: In ADOPT-A, HF-related clinical events and deaths were related to LV dysfunction and not to atrial pacing overdriven by the AF suppression algorithm.
Authors: William T Abraham; Westby G Fisher; Andrew L Smith; David B Delurgio; Angel R Leon; Evan Loh; Dusan Z Kocovic; Milton Packer; Alfredo L Clavell; David L Hayes; Myrvin Ellestad; Robin J Trupp; Jackie Underwood; Faith Pickering; Cindy Truex; Peggy McAtee; John Messenger Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-06-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Stefan Wiberg; Stefan Lönnerholm; Steen M Jensen; Per Blomström; Ivar Ringqvist; Carina Blomström-Lundqvist Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: Mark D Carlson; John Ip; John Messenger; Scott Beau; Steven Kalbfleisch; Pierre Gervais; Douglas A Cameron; Aurelio Duran; Jesus Val-Mejias; Judith Mackall; Michael Gold Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2003-08-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Luigi Padeletti; Helmut Pürerfellner; Stuart W Adler; Theodore J Waller; Mark Harvey; Lewis Horvitz; Reece Holbrook; Kitty Kempen; Andrew Mugglin; Douglas A Hettrick Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2003-11
Authors: Luigi Padeletti; Nicola Musilli; Maria Cristina Porciani; Andrea Colella; Luigi Di Biase; Giuseppe Ricciardi; Paolo Pieragnoli; Antonio Michelucci; GianFranco Gensini Journal: Europace Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Michael O Sweeney; Anne S Hellkamp; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; Arnold J Greenspon; Roger A Freedman; Kerry L Lee; Gervasio A Lamas Journal: Circulation Date: 2003-06-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: S Garrigue; S S Barold; S Cazeau; L Gencel; P Jaïs; M Haissaguerre; J Clémenty Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 1998-09 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: Michael A Lee; Richard Weachter; Scott Pollak; Mark S Kremers; Ajay M Naik; Russell Silverman; Joann Tuzi; Wayne Wang; Linda J Johnson; David E Euler Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2003-06-04 Impact factor: 24.094