Clinical trials of pacing mode selection

Effects of cardiac pacemakers on left ventricular volumes and function assessed by 3D echocardiography, Doppler method, and global longitudinal strain

Background

Many previous studies reported the negative effects of right ventricular (RV) pacing on the left ventricular (LV) structure and ejection fraction. Studying pacing hemodynamics is essential to understand these detrimental effects. In this study, we tried to understand RV pacing effects on LV volumes and function using advanced tools like 3D echo and global longitudinal strain (GLS). This was a prospective study of 175 consecutive patients (LVEF>50%) presented permanent pacing. Of 175 patients, only 50 patients met study criteria, divided into two groups (single or dual pacing). LV volumes and function were assessed by full-volume 3D echocardiography and GLS before pacing, at 1-week and 6-month post-pacing. Cardiac output (COP) was calculated by pulsed wave Doppler method and 3D echo.

Results

Doppler method results were similar to 3D echo in calculating SV and COP. At 1-week post pacing, both groups showed a significant decrease in SV due to a drop in EDV while ESV did not change significantly. Despite the drop in SV, there was a significant increase in cardiac output (COP) due to achieving higher heart rates post-pacing. There was a significant drop in EF and GLS in both groups.

At 6 months, SV continued to decrease with a corresponding decrease in COP and LVEF. This drop in SV was due to a significant increase in ESV while EDV did not show a significant change at a 6-month follow-up. Also, the drop EF and GLS became more significant.

There were no significant differences between both groups regarding the changes in LV volumes (EDV, ESV, SV), LVEF or GLS throughout the study (pre-pacing, at 1-week and 6-months post pacing). However, dual-chamber pacing group provided higher heart rates and as a result higher COP than the single-chamber group.

Conclusions

RV pacing led to a significant drop in LV COP, ejection fraction (EF), and GLS over short- and long-term duration. Dual chamber pacing provided higher COP than a single chamber pacing. This was due to tracking the S. A node with pacing at higher heart rates not due to an increase in SV and preserving atrioventricular synchrony. Both Doppler method and 3D echo can be used to calculate SV and COP.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43044-021-00138-9.

Choosing pacemakers appropriately

The range of implantable cardiac pacing devices has expanded, with the advances in available technology. Indications for cardiac pacing devices, that is pacemakers, implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronisation therapy devices (CRTs), have expanded for the treatment, diagnosis and monitoring of bradycardia, tachycardia and heart failure. While the need for pacemakers is increasing, not all patients who require pacemakers are receiving them, especially in the Asia-Pacific region. There is a need to be more critical in advising the use of more expensive devices like ICDs and CRT/CRT-D devices, since most patients in the Asia-Pacific region pay out of pocket for these therapies. The AHA-ACC guidelines need not be blindly followed, since they are too wide-sweeping and are often based on the intention-to-treat basis of trials rather than on the parameters of the patients actually enrolled.

Cardiovascular outcomes with atrial-based pacing compared with ventricular pacing: meta-analysis of randomized trials, using individual patient data

BACKGROUND

Several randomized trials have compared atrial-based (dual-chamber or atrial) pacing with ventricular pacing in patients with bradycardia. No trial has shown a mortality reduction, and only 1 small trial suggested a reduction in stroke. The goal of this review was to determine whether atrial-based pacing prevents major cardiovascular events.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic review was performed of publications since 1980. For inclusion, trials had to compare an atrial-based with a ventricular-based pacing mode; use a randomized, controlled, parallel design; and have data on mortality, stroke, heart failure, or atrial fibrillation. Individual patient data were obtained from 5 of the 8 identified studies, representing 95% of patients in the 8 trials, and a total of 35 000 patient-years of follow-up. There was no significant heterogeneity among the results of the individual trials. There was no significant reduction in mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 1.03; P=0.19) or heart failure (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.03; P=0.15) with atrial-based pacing. There was a significant reduction in atrial fibrillation (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.89; P=0.00003) and a reduction in stroke that was of borderline significance (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.99; P=0.035). There was no convincing evidence that any patient subgroup received special benefit from atrial-based pacing.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with ventricular pacing, the use of atrial-based pacing does not improve survival or reduce heart failure or cardiovascular death. However, atrial-based pacing reduces the incidence of atrial fibrillation and may modestly reduce stroke.

Duration of no-load state affects opening angle of porcine coronary arteries

The zero-stress state of a blood vessel has been extensively studied because it is the reference state for which all calculations of intramural stress and strain must be based. It has also been found to reflect nonuniformity in growth and remodeling in response to chemical or physical changes. The zero-stress state can be characterized by an opening angle, defined as the angle subtended by two radii connecting the midpoint of the inner wall. All prior studies documented the zero-stress state or opening angle with no regard to duration of the no-load state. Our hypotheses were that, given the viscoelastic properties of blood vessels, the zero-stress state may have "memory" of prior circumferential and axial loading, i.e., duration of the no-load state influences opening angle. To test these hypotheses, we considered ring pairs of porcine coronary arteries to examine the effect of duration in the no-load state after circumferential distension. Our results show a significant reduction in opening angle as duration of the no-load state increases, i.e., vessels that are reduced to the zero-stress state directly from the loaded state attain much larger opening angles at 30 min after the radial cut than rings that are in the no-load state for various durations. To examine the effect of axial loading, we found similar reductions in opening angle with duration in the no-load from the in situ state, albeit the effect was significantly smaller than that of circumferential loading. Hence, we found that the zero-stress state has memory of both circumferential and axial loading. These results are important for understanding viscoelastic properties of coronary arteries, interpretation of the enormous data on the opening angle and strain in the literature, and standardization of future measurements on the zero-stress state.

Single-chamber versus dual-chamber pacing for high-grade atrioventricular block

BACKGROUND

In the treatment of atrioventricular block, dual-chamber cardiac pacing is thought to confer a clinical benefit as compared with single-chamber ventricular pacing, but the supporting evidence is mainly from retrospective studies. Uncertainty persists regarding the true benefits of dual-chamber pacing, particularly in the elderly, in whom it is used less often than in younger patients.

METHODS

In a multicenter, randomized, parallel-group trial, 2021 patients 70 years of age or older who were undergoing their first pacemaker implant for high-grade atrioventricular block were randomly assigned to receive a single-chamber ventricular pacemaker (1009 patients) or a dual-chamber pacemaker (1012 patients). In the single-chamber group, patients were randomly assigned to receive either fixed-rate pacing (504 patients) or rate-adaptive pacing (505 patients). The primary outcome was death from all causes. Secondary outcomes included atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and a composite of stroke, transient ischemic attack, or other thromboembolism.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 4.6 years for mortality and 3 years for other cardiovascular events. The mean annual mortality rate was 7.2 percent in the single-chamber group and 7.4 percent in the dual-chamber group (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.83 to 1.11). We found no significant differences between the group with single-chamber pacing and that with dual-chamber pacing in the rates of atrial fibrillation, heart failure, or a composite of stroke, transient ischemic attack, or other thromboembolism.

CONCLUSIONS

In elderly patients with high-grade atrioventricular block, the pacing mode does not influence the rate of death from all causes during the first five years or the incidence of cardiovascular events during the first three years after implantation of a pacemaker.

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

BACKGROUND

Dual chamber pacing or single chamber atrial pacing ('physiologic' pacing) is believed to have an advantage over single chamber ventricular pacing in that it resembles cardiac physiology more closely by maintaining atrioventricular (AV) synchrony and dominance of the sinus node, which in turn may reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality thus contributing to patient survival and quality of life. However, a significant proportion of pacemakers currently implanted are single chamber ventricular pacemakers.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the short- and long-term clinical effectiveness of dual chamber pacemakers compared to single chamber ventricular pacemakers in adults with AV block, sick sinus syndrome or both. An additional objective was to assess separately any potential differences in effectiveness between dual chamber pacing and single chamber atrial pacing. The clinical effectiveness of single chamber atrial pacing versus single chamber ventricular pacing was not examined.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2002), MEDLINE (1966 to 2002), EMBASE (1980 to 2002) and the Science Citation Index (1980 to 2002) were searched on 19th August 2002. Citation lists and web sites were checked and researchers in the field contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Parallel group or crossover randomised controlled trials of at least 48 hours duration comparing dual chamber pacing and single chamber ventricular pacing, and investigating cardiovascular morbidity, mortality, patient related quality of life, exercise capacity and complication rates.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data was extracted onto pre-piloted data extraction forms. Quality assessment was undertaken using a checklist, with a sub-sample of quality data independently extracted by a second reviewer. Where appropriate data was available, meta-analysis was performed. Where meta-analysis was not possible, the number of studies showing a positive, neutral or negative direction of effect and statistical significance were simply counted.

MAIN RESULTS

Five parallel and 26 crossover randomised controlled trials were identified. The quality of reporting was found to be poor. Pooled data from parallel studies shows a statistically non-significant preference for physiologic pacing (primarily dual chamber pacing) for the prevention of stroke, heart failure and mortality, and a statistically significant beneficial effect regarding the prevention of atrial fibrillation (odds ratio (OR) 0.79, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.93). Both parallel and crossover studies favour dual chamber pacing with regard to pacemaker syndrome (parallel: Peto OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.14; crossover: standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.74, 95% CI - 0.95 to -0.52). Pooled data from crossover studies shows a statistically significant trend towards dual chamber pacing being more favourable in terms of exercise capacity (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.03 to -0.45). No individual studies reported a significantly more favourable outcome with single chamber ventricular pacing.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows a trend towards greater effectiveness with dual chamber pacing compared to single chamber ventricular pacing, which supports the current British Pacing and Electrophysiology Group's Guidelines regarding atrioventricular block. Additional randomised controlled trial evidence from ongoing trials in this area will further inform the debate.

An update on clinical trials in pacing: is dual chamber pacing better?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As pacemaker technology has increased in complexity and now offers a variety of additional capabilities, there is uncertainty as to which pacing mode offers more benefit-dual-chamber or single-chamber.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two large-scale randomized trials, the Canadian Trial of Physiologic Pacing and the Mode Selection Trial, demonstrated that dual-chamber pacing does not reduce the incidence of stroke or improve survival when compared with ventricular pacing. However, dual-chamber pacing does reduce the incidence of atrial fibrillation and in patients with sinus node dysfunction, reduces heart failure symptoms when compared with ventricular pacing. The modest results of these trials were unexpected when viewed in the context of the very favorable retrospective studies.

SUMMARY

A rethinking of the physiology of cardiac pacing has led to the concept that although atrioventricular synchrony supports an improvement in cardiac output and ventricular pressures, these favorable hemodynamics may be attenuated by ventricular dyssynchrony from right ventricular apical pacing. In patients with a reduced ejection fraction, this dyssynchrony may be especially detrimental. Two trials (DANPACE and SAVE-PACE) are currently underway that will clarify the clinical significance of reducing forced ventricular desynchronization. The results of these trials may direct pacemaker physicians away from the right ventricular apical lead toward a new imperative of atrioventricular and right ventricular-left ventricular synchrony.

Pacing interventions for falls and syncope in the elderly

There is a high prevalence of cardiovascular disorders among elderly patients with recurrent falls or syncope, and cardiovascular causes are implicated in a significant proportion of three cases. Common cardiovascular causes of falls and syncope include carotid sinus syndrome, vasovagal episodes, sick sinus syndrome, and atrioventricular block. A comprehensive history and physical examination supplemented by electrocardiographic monitoring, carotid sinus massage, and tilt-table testing in appropriately selected patients form the basis of the diagnostic evaluation to exclude a significant cardiovascular disorder. Patients with documented symptomatic bradycardia often benefit from pacemaker implantation, as evidenced by a reduction in recurrent events and improved quality of life. Although dual-chamber pacemakers, particularly those with rate responsiveness, provide more physiologic pacing than single-chamber ventricular devices, the superiority of dual-chamber pacemakers in reducing major clinical events has not been demonstrated. The efficacy of an aggressive evaluation and patient-management strategy that includes pacemaker implantation for elderly patients with recurrent falls has been validated only by one prospective clinical trial; however, available data are compelling. For a variety of cardiovascular conditions, permanent pacemaker implantation has a demonstrated efficacy to prevent symptoms that arise from transient hypotension and decreased cerebral perfusion. The implication of these data is that many falls may be preventable through permanent pacemaker implantation in appropriately selected patients.

Cardiac pacing. A review

Pacing is a field of rapid clinical progress and technologic advances. Clinical progress in the 1990s included the refinement of indications for pacing as well as the use of pacemakers for new, nonbradycardiac indications, such as the treatment of cardiomyopathies and CHF and the prevention of atrial fibrillation. Important published data and studies in progress are shedding new light on issues of pacing mode selection, and they may influence future practice significantly. Important technologic advances include development of new rate-adaptive sensors and sensor combinations and the evolution of pacemakers into sophisticated diagnostic devices with the capability to store data and ECGs. Automatic algorithms monitor the patient for appropriate capture, sensing, battery status, and lead impedance, providing better patient safety and pacemaker longevity.

Atrial fibrillation: treatment rationale and clinical utility of nonpharmacologic therapies

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained cardiac dysrhythmia requiring therapy. Nonpharmacologic therapies for the treatment of AF, namely, catheter ablation, cardiac pacing, internal defibrillation, and dysrhythmia surgery are playing an increasingly important role in the overall management of AF. Although usually prescribed when traditional pharmacologic therapy is not effective, not tolerated, or contraindicated, these therapies are rapidly assuming a more prominent role as they mature. These modern therapies for AF, offering the promise of prevention and cure of AF, potential elimination from the sequelae of AF, and significant improvements in quality of life, are increasingly becoming more frequent in clinical practice. Further investigation is needed to determine which therapy is ideally suited for an individual patient and the impact of these varying therapies on morbidity and mortality.