Literature DB >> 9249829

AAIR versus DDDR pacing in patients with impaired sinus node chronotropy: an echocardiographic and cardiopulmonary study.

P E Vardas1, E N Simantirakis, F I Parthenakis, S I Chrysostomakis, E I Skalidis, E G Zuridakis.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare AAIR and DDDR pacing at rest and during exercise. We studied 15 patients (10 men, age 65 +/- 6 years) who had been paced for at least 3 months with activity sensor rate modulated dual chamber pacemakers. All had sick sinus syndrome (SSS) with impaired sinus node chronotropy. The patients underwent a resting echocardiographic evaluation of systolic and diastolic LV function at 60 beats/min during AAIR and DDDR pacing with an AV delay, which ensured complete ventricular activation capture. Cardiac output (CO) was also measured during pacing at 100 beats/min in both pacing modes. Subsequently, the oxygen consumption (VO2AT) and VO2AT pulse at the anaerobic threshold were measured during exercise in AAIR mode and in DDDR mode with an AV delay of 120 ms. The indices of diastolic function showed no significant differences between the two pacing modes, except for patients with a stimulus-R interval > 220 ms, for whom the time velocity integral of LV filling and LV inflow time were significantly lower under AAI than under DDD pacing. At 60 beats/min, CO was higher under AAI than under DDD mode only when the stimulus-R interval was below 220 ms. For stimulus-R intervals longer than 220 ms, and also during pacing at 100 beats/min, the CO was higher in DDD mode. The stimulus-R interval decreased in all patients during exercise. The time to anaerobic threshold, VO2AT, and VO2AT pulse showed no significant differences between the two pacing modes. Our results indicate that, at rest, although AAIR pacing does not improve diastolic function in patients with SSS, it maintains a higher CO than does DDDR pacing in cases where the stimulus-R interval is not excessively prolonged. On exertion, the two pacing modes appear to be equally effective, at least in cases where the stimulus-R interval decreases in AAIR mode.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9249829     DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1997.tb03564.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol        ISSN: 0147-8389            Impact factor:   1.976


  5 in total

1.  Non-physiological increase of AV conduction time in sinus disease patients programmed in AAIR-based pacing mode.

Authors:  Philippe Mabo; Jean-Pierre Cebron; Aude Solnon; Aude Tassin; Laurence Graindorge; Daniel Gras
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2012-07-27       Impact factor: 1.900

2.  Suppression of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation by pacing.

Authors:  Anoop K Gupta
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2003-04-01

3.  Diastolic and systolic right ventricular dysfunction precedes left ventricular dysfunction in patients paced from right ventricular apex.

Authors:  S K Dwivedi; Sandeep Bansal; Aniket Puri; M K Makharia; V S Narain; R K Saran; M Hasan; V K Puri
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2006-07-01

4.  The effects of right ventricular apical pacing on left ventricular function. Stimulation of the right ventricular apex: should it still be the gold standard?

Authors:  T Szili-Torok; A Thornton
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2003-04-01

Review 5.  Dual chamber versus single chamber ventricular pacemakers for sick sinus syndrome and atrioventricular block.

Authors:  J Dretzke; W D Toff; G Y H Lip; J Raftery; A Fry-Smith; R Taylor
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2004
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.