Effectiveness of Ventricular Intrinsic Preference (VIP™) and Ventricular AutoCapture (VAC) algorithms in pacemaker patients: Results of the validate study

BACKGROUND

Several past clinical studies have demonstrated that frequent and unnecessary right ventricular pacing in patients with sick sinus syndrome and compromised atrio-ventricular conduction (AVC) produces long-term adverse effects. The safety and efficacy of two pacemaker algorithms, Ventricular Intrinsic Preference™ (VIP) and Ventricular AutoCapture (VAC), were evaluated in a multi-center study in pacemaker patients.

METHODS

We evaluated 80 patients across 10 centers in India. Patients were enrolled within 15 days of dual chamber pacemaker (DDDR) implantation, and within 45 days thereafter were classified to either a compromised AVC (cAVC) arm or an intact AVC (iAVC) arm based on intrinsic paced/sensed (AV/PV) delays. In each arm, patients were then randomized (1:1) into the following groups: VIP OFF and VAC OFF (Control group; CG), or VIP ON and VAC ON (Treatment Group; TG). Subsequently, the AV/PV delays in the CG groups were mandatorily programmed at 180/150 ms, and to up to 350 ms in the TG groups. The percentage of right ventricular pacing (%RVp) evaluated at 12-month post-implantation follow-ups were compared between the two groups in each arm. Additionally, in-clinic time required for collecting device data was compared between patients programmed with the automated AutoCapture algorithm activated (VAC ON) vs. the manually programmed method (VAC OFF).

RESULTS

Patients randomized to the TG with the VIP algorithm activated exhibited a significantly lower %RVp at 12 months than those in the CG in both the cAVC arm (39±41% vs. 97±3%; p=0.0004) and the iAVC arm (15±25% vs. 68±39%; p=0.0067). In-clinic time required to collect device data was less in patients with the VAC algorithm activated. No device-related adverse events were reported during the year-long study period.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study cohort, the use of the VIP algorithm significantly reduced the %RVp, while the VAC algorithm reduced in-clinic time needed to collect device data.

Hybrid therapy in the management of atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation is the most common sustained arrhythmia. Because of the sub-optimal outcomes and associated risks of medical therapy as well as the recent advances in non-pharmacologic strategies, a multitude of combined (hybrid) algorithms have been introduced that improve efficacy of standalone therapies while maintaining a high safety profile. Antiarrhythmic administration enhances success rate of electrical cardioversion. Catheter ablation of antiarrhythmic drug-induced typical atrial flutter may prevent recurrent atrial fibrillation. Through simple ablation in the right atrium, suppression of atrial fibrillation may be achieved in patients with previously ineffective antiarrhythmic therapy. Efficacy of complex catheter ablation in the left atrium is improved with antiarrhythmic drugs. Catheter ablation followed by permanent pacemaker implantation is an effective and safe treatment option for selected patients. Additional strategies include pacing therapies such as atrial pacing with permanent pacemakers, preventive pacing algorithms, and/or implantable dual-chamber defibrillators are available. Modern hybrid strategies combining both epicardial and endocardial approaches in order to create a complex set of radiofrequency lesions in the left atrium have demonstrated a high rate of success and warrant further research. Hybrid therapy for atrial fibrillation reviews history of development of non-pharmacological treatment strategies and outlines avenues of ongoing research in this field.

Newer algorithms in bradycardia management

Permanent cardiac pacemakers (PPM) are effective in the treatment of bradycardia in a growing number of clinical scenarios. An appreciation of the capacity of PPMs to result in negative hemodynamic and proarrhythmic effects has grown alongside clinical experience with permanent pacing. Such experience has necessitated the development of algorithms aimed at optimizing device functionality across a broad spectrum of physiologic and pathologic conditions. This review highlights recent device-based algorithms used in automated threshold testing, reduction of right ventricular pacing, prevention and treatment of pacemaker-mediated tachycardia, mode switching for atrial tachyarrhythmias, rate-modulated pacing, and advances in arrhythmia storage and remote monitoring.

Comparison of pacing algorithms to avoid unnecessary ventricular pacing in patients with sick sinus node syndrome: a single-centre, observational, parallel study

AIMS

Reduction of unnecessary ventricular pacing (uVP) is an essential component in the treatment strategy in any pacing population in general. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of different algorithms to reduce uVP in an adult population with sick sinus syndrome (SSS) treated outside of clinical trials. Evaluation of the relationship between different types of pacing algorithms and clinical outcomes is also provided.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a single-centre, observational, parallel study, based on retrospective analysis of the Arrhythmology Cardiology Center of Armenia electronic clinical database. This study evaluated atrial pacing percentage (AP%), ventricular pacing percentage (VP%), and the incidence of atrial high rate episodes in 56 patients with SSS using three different pacing strategies: managed VP, search atrioventricular (AV), and fixed long AV. We did not find statistically significant differences in the amount of VP between the groups. Although the atrial high rate percentage (AHR%) tended to be higher in the fixed long AV group, this difference was not statistically significant. Mean VP% and AP% were similar in all three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, all three programmed strategies produced the same mean AP% and VP%, and were equally efficient in uVP reduction. There was no relationship between chosen algorithms and the incidence of pacemaker syndrome, hospitalizations, or change in New York Heart Association class. The percentage of AHR was not associated with pacing strategy or co-morbidities but showed borderline correlation with left atrial size.