Literature DB >> 9825321

Programmed atrial sensitivity: a critical determinant in atrial fibrillation detection and optimal automatic mode switching.

S K Leung1, C P Lau, C T Lam, H F Tse, M O Tang, F Chung, G Ayers.   

Abstract

Automatic mode switching (AMS) prevents tracking of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) in dual chamber pacing. The correct detection of AF can be affected by the programmed atrial sensitivity (AS). We prospectively studied the relationship between AS, AF undersensing, and AMS, using unfiltered bipolar intracardiac atrial electrograms recorded from 17 patients during sinus rhythm (SR) and in AF. Overall, 780 rhythms were recorded and replayed onto three dual chamber pacemaker models using different AMS algorithms (Thera DR 7940, Marathon DDDR 294-09, and Meta DDDR 1254), and the ventricular responses were measured. AS was randomly programmed in steps from the highest available AS to half of the mean atrial P wave amplitude (PWA), and the percentage of appropriate AMS responses (defined as a ventricular pacing rate at the expected AMS mode) were recorded. AMS efficacy was related to the programmed AS settings in an exponential manner. At low AS settings, a higher percentage of tests were associated with absence of, or with intermittent AMS and tracking of AF, whereas at higher AS, oversensing of noise during SR occurred. An optimal AS measured approximately 1.3 mV, representing about one-third of the PWA measured during SR, although oversensing of SR and undersensing of AF continued to occur in 14% of tests and time, respectively, due to the high variation in PWA during AF. Thus, a fixed AS cannot eliminate AF undersensing without inviting noise oversensing, suggesting the need for automatic adjustments of AS, or the use of a rate-limiting algorithm to prevent rate oscillation during intermittent AF sensing. In conclusion, AMS functions of existing pacemakers were significantly limited by the undersensing of AF and oversensing of noise. Proper adjustment of the AS is important to enable effective AMS during AF.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9825321     DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1998.tb01155.x

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


  5 in total

Review 1.  A reappraisal of pacemaker timing cycles pertaining to automatic mode switching.

Authors:  R X Stroobandt; S S Barold; F D Vandenbulcke; R J Willems; A F Sinnaeve
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 1.900

Review 2.  Pacing technology: advances in pacing threshold management.

Authors:  Chu-pak Lau; Chung-wah Siu
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.066

3.  Use of an atrial lead with very short tip-to-ring spacing avoids oversensing of far-field R-wave.

Authors:  Christof Kolb; Georg Nölker; Carsten Lennerz; Hansmartin Jetter; Verena Semmler; Klaus Pürner; Klaus-Jürgen Gutleben; Tilko Reents; Klaus Lang; Ulrich Lotze
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Automatic mode switching in atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Giuseppe Stabile; Antonio De Simone; Enrico Romano
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2005-07-01

Review 5.  The role of pacing in rhythm control and management of atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  John Silberbauer; Neil Sulke
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2007-05-02       Impact factor: 1.759

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.