OBJECTIVE: To prove that long-distance running is safe for athletes with pacemaker devices, pacemaker function was evaluated in nine long-distance runners. METHOD: Nine runners participated in a nine-month training programme that involved running for 1000 or 2000 km in preparation for either a full or a half marathon. A professional coach, three cardiologists and a technician - all with running experience - conducted the training and medical checkups. Commercial heart rate monitors were used during training to assess heart rates at rest, and during exercise and long-distance running. Sensing and pacing functions of the pacemaker system were tested during training sessions as well as during the race. In addition, the ChampionChip (a time registration device used in competition) and the Polar heart rate monitor (a widely used self-monitoring device) were tested for possible interference with the pacemaker. RESULTS: All nine athletes completed the Amsterdam 2001 half or full marathon without any pacemaker dysfunction. A short survey after two years showed no pacemaker dysfunction. CONCLUSION: Long-distance running is safe for athletes with pacemaker implants. Overall fitness and sufficient endurance training remain the prerequisites for maintaining the condition necessary for successful completion of a marathon regardless of medical status. In our study, it became clear that for patients who had received a pacemaker because of complete heart block, the upper rate of the pacemaker programme needed to be adjusted to 170 to 180 ppm to insure 1:1 atrio-ventricular synchrony during high atrial rates. It is concluded that there is no a priori reason for cardiologists to advise against long-distance running in athletes with pacemakers. Patients with known or suspected structural heart disease should be screened according the recommendations.
OBJECTIVE: To prove that long-distance running is safe for athletes with pacemaker devices, pacemaker function was evaluated in nine long-distance runners. METHOD: Nine runners participated in a nine-month training programme that involved running for 1000 or 2000 km in preparation for either a full or a half marathon. A professional coach, three cardiologists and a technician - all with running experience - conducted the training and medical checkups. Commercial heart rate monitors were used during training to assess heart rates at rest, and during exercise and long-distance running. Sensing and pacing functions of the pacemaker system were tested during training sessions as well as during the race. In addition, the ChampionChip (a time registration device used in competition) and the Polar heart rate monitor (a widely used self-monitoring device) were tested for possible interference with the pacemaker. RESULTS: All nine athletes completed the Amsterdam 2001 half or full marathon without any pacemaker dysfunction. A short survey after two years showed no pacemaker dysfunction. CONCLUSION: Long-distance running is safe for athletes with pacemaker implants. Overall fitness and sufficient endurance training remain the prerequisites for maintaining the condition necessary for successful completion of a marathon regardless of medical status. In our study, it became clear that for patients who had received a pacemaker because of complete heart block, the upper rate of the pacemaker programme needed to be adjusted to 170 to 180 ppm to insure 1:1 atrio-ventricular synchrony during high atrial rates. It is concluded that there is no a priori reason for cardiologists to advise against long-distance running in athletes with pacemakers. Patients with known or suspected structural heart disease should be screened according the recommendations.