AIMS: To compare the risk of atrioventricular (AV) conduction disturbance between patients with sinus node dysfunction on AAI pacing who had a low or high Wenckebach block rate (WBR). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with sinus node dysfunction and normal AV conduction those underwent an electrophysiological study were studied. The patients were classified into two groups: Group L was with the patients with a WBR of 100 to 129 per minute and Group H was with the patients with a WBR > or = 130 per minute. All patients followed up every 3-6 months after an AAI pacemaker implantation. A total of 102 patients, including 35 Group L and 67 Group H, were followed for 90 +/- 44 months. Six patients died from non-cardiac cause and five patients required a new atrial lead implantation due to lead failure during follow-up. Symptomatic bradycardia requiring a new ventricular lead implantation developed in four patients (annual incidence 0.5%). In Group L, two patients developed AV block (annual incidence 0.7%). In Group H, two patients developed bradycardic atrial fibrillation (annual incidence 0.4%). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.2983). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that a long-term risk of developing AV conduction disturbance is low even in patients with a WBR of 100 to 129 per minute.
AIMS: To compare the risk of atrioventricular (AV) conduction disturbance between patients with sinus node dysfunction on AAI pacing who had a low or high Wenckebach block rate (WBR). METHODS AND RESULTS:Patients with sinus node dysfunction and normal AV conduction those underwent an electrophysiological study were studied. The patients were classified into two groups: Group L was with the patients with a WBR of 100 to 129 per minute and Group H was with the patients with a WBR > or = 130 per minute. All patients followed up every 3-6 months after an AAI pacemaker implantation. A total of 102 patients, including 35 Group L and 67 Group H, were followed for 90 +/- 44 months. Six patients died from non-cardiac cause and five patients required a new atrial lead implantation due to lead failure during follow-up. Symptomatic bradycardia requiring a new ventricular lead implantation developed in four patients (annual incidence 0.5%). In Group L, two patients developed AV block (annual incidence 0.7%). In Group H, two patients developed bradycardic atrial fibrillation (annual incidence 0.4%). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.2983). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that a long-term risk of developing AV conduction disturbance is low even in patients with a WBR of 100 to 129 per minute.