Programming of sensor driven pacemakers

Rate-Responsive Cardiac Pacing: Technological Solutions and Their Applications

Modern cardiac pacemakers are equipped with a function that allows the heart rate to adapt to the current needs of the patient in situations of increased demand related to exercise and stress ("rate-response" function). This function may be based on a variety of mechanisms, such as a built-in accelerometer responding to increased chest movement or algorithms sensing metabolic demand for oxygen, analysis of intrathoracic impedance, and analysis of the heart rhythm (Q-T interval). The latest technologies in the field of rate-response functionality relate to the use of an accelerometer in leadless endocavitary pacemakers; in these devices, the accelerometer enables mapping of the mechanical wave of the heart's work cycle, enabling the pacemaker to correctly sense native impulses and stimulate the ventricles in synchrony with the cycles of atria and heart valves. Another modern system for synchronizing pacing rate with the patient's real-time needs requires a closed-loop system that continuously monitors changes in the dynamics of heart contractions. This article discusses the technical details of various solutions for detecting and responding to situations related to increased oxygen demand (e.g., exercise or stress) in implantable pacemakers, and reviews the results of clinical trials regarding the use of these algorithms.

Heart rate distribution in dogs with third degree atrioventricular block and rate responsive pacemakers

INTRODUCTION

In dogs, single lead ventricular pacing, ventricular sensing, inhibition response, rate adaptive (VVIR) pacemakers are routinely used to treat third degree atrioventricular block. The objectives of this study were to investigate the heart rate distribution in dogs with VVIR pacemakers, and report changes when activity settings were adjusted.

ANIMALS

Eighteen client-owned dogs with VVIR pacemakers for third degree atrioventricular block.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This observational study consisted of a review of medical records of dogs with VVIR pacemakers. For dogs with >50% of paced beats at the lower pacing rate, the activity daily living (ADL) and exertion responses were increased. Re-evaluations were performed after 6-12 months.

RESULTS

Heart rate distribution similar to healthy dogs was absent for all dogs. In nine dogs, the ADL and exertion responses were increased to the highest level. Of these, three dogs showed no improvement in heart rate distribution; for two dogs, one with an epicardial pacemaker, several activity settings were adjusted and pacing at higher heart rates was observed at re-evaluation. Four dogs died or were lost to follow-up. Clinical signs had resolved for all dogs after pacemaker implantation.

CONCLUSION

Default activity settings of VVIR pacemakers do not result in heart rate distribution equivalent to healthy dogs. Increasing the ADL and exertion response settings to the highest levels did not improve the pacemaker rate response. Further investigations into the role of dog size, generator positioning, pacemaker settings, and whether rate responsiveness is required for dogs' quality and quantity of life are warranted.

A new algorithm for optimization of rate-adaptive pacing improves exercise tolerance in patients with HFpEF

AIM

To develop an algorithm for optimization of rate-adaptive pacing settings in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and permanent cardiac pacing.

METHODS

This is a prospective randomized controlled study. A total of 54 patients with HFpEF, permanent atrial fibrillation (AF), and VVIR pacing were randomized to an intervention group with optimization of rate-adaptation parameters by using cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and pacemaker stress echocardiography (PASE), and to a control group with conventional programming. CPET, 6-min walk test (6-mwt), echocardiography (echo), Duke Activity Status Index (DASI), and Minnesota questionnaire (MLHFQ) were performed at baseline and after 3 months. PASE was used to exclude exercise-induced ischemia and to determine safe upper sensor rate. Pacing parameters were corrected to achieve optimal heart rate increments of 3-6 bpm for 1 mL/min/kg of VO₂ (oxygen uptake).

RESULTS

After 3 months, the intervention group demonstrated significant improvement of VO₂ peak by 1.64 ± 1.6 mL/min/kg, anaerobic threshold by 1.33 ± 1.3 mL/min/kg, exercise time by 170 ± 98 s, 6-mwt distance by 75 ± 63 m (P < .0001 for all), DASI by 5.23 points (P = .009), MLHFQ-score (reduction by 9 points, P < .0001), and echo parameters (decrease in LA volume from 108 (84; 132) to 95 (85; 130) mL, P = .026; E/e' from 11.7 ± 3.2 to 10.4 ± 2.9, P = .025; systolic pulmonary artery pressure (SPAP) from 44 ± 14 to 39 ± 12 mm Hg, P = .001) compared to the control group.

CONCLUSION

An algorithm incorporating CPET and PASE for optimal programming of rate-adaptation parameters is a valuable tool to improve exercise capacity in HFpEF patients with permanent AF and VVIR pacing who remain exercise intolerant after conventional programming.

Individual optimization of pacing sensors improves exercise capacity without influencing quality of life

INTRODUCTION

Programmable pacemaker sensor features are frequently used in default setting. Limited data are available about the effect of sensor optimization on exercise capacity and quality of life (QOL). Influence of individual optimization of sensors on QOL and exercise tolerance was investigated in a randomized, single blind study in patients with VVIR, DDDR, or AAIR pacemakers.

METHODS

Patients with > or =75% pacing were randomized to optimized sensor settings (OSS) or default sensor setting (DSS). Standardized optimization was performed using three different exercise tests. QOL questionnaires (QOL-q: Hacettepe, Karolinska, and RAND-36) were used for evaluation of the sensor optimization. One month before and after optimization, exercise capacity using chronotropic assessment exercise protocol and the three QOL-q were assessed.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients (26 male, 28 female) with a mean age of 65 +/- 16 years were enrolled in the study. In each group (OSS and DSS) 27 patients were included. One month after sensor optimization, the achieved maximal heart rate (HR) and metabolic workload (METS) were significantly higher in OSS when compared with DSS (124 +/- 28 bpm vs 108 +/- 20 bpm, P = 0.036; 7.3 +/- 4 METS vs 4.9 +/- 4 METS, P = 0.045). Highest HR and METS were achieved in patients with pacemakers with accessible sensor algorithms. In patients with automatic slope settings (33%), exercise capacity did not improve after sensor optimization. QOL did not improve in OSS compared with DSS.

CONCLUSION

After 1 month of individual optimization of rate response pacemakers, exercise capacity was improved and maximum HR increased, although QOL remained unchanged. Accessible pacemaker sensor algorithms are mandatory for individual optimization.

Successful use of an acceleration rate response pacemaker with a transvenous steroid-eluting screw-in lead for third-degree atrioventricular block in a labrador retriever

Permanent pacemakers are commonly used in veterinary practice and can have a dramatic effect on the treatment of heart block. A Labrador Retriever dog suffering from exercise intolerance secondary to third degree atrioventricular block was treated with a new pacemaker system. A steroid-eluting screw-in type lead that has the advantage of being more fixed to the myocardial wall without increasing the pacing threshold was used. The heart rate was regulated with an acceleration sensing pacemaker generator that included several automatic modulation systems. Nineteen months after implantation, the dog has a normal level of activity. The present case suggests that this pacemaker design may offer important advantages for canine patients.