Initial experience with physiological pacing

Cardiac pacing and coronary hemodynamics

This article reviews the current knowledge on the effects of pacing on coronary hemodynamics. In particular, the possible effects of heart rate, atrioventricular delay, ventricular depolarization sequence, and ventricular pacing site on the coronary circulation are examined.

Reasons for reprogramming dual chamber pacemakers to VVI mode: a retrospective review using a computer database

Seven hundred seventy-one dual chamber pacemakers implanted over a 13-year period were identified using a computer database. The mean follow-up period was 40.4 +/- 30.9 months (mean +/- SD). Thirty-three (4.3%) patients were reprogrammed to the VVI mode after a mean period of 26.4 +/- 29 months. Indications for pacing in those reprogrammed were: complete heart block 45.7%, impaired AV conduction 5.7%, sick sinus syndrome 34.2%, carotid sinus syndrome 11.4%, and vasovagal syndrome 2.8%. The most common reason for reprogramming was development of sustained atrial arrhythmias (atrial fibrillation or flutter), which occurred in 25 patients (3.3% of entire group). The remaining 8 (1% of entire group) were reprogrammed because of atrial lead related problems.

Pacemaker hemodynamics: clinical implications

Our review of the current literature and experience in caring for pacemaker patients suggests that a consideration of hemodynamics is a logical way to approach pacemaker selection and programming. Multiple clinical factors enter into the selection of a pacemaker or pacemaker programming settings in each case. It appears that in patients with sinus node disease, atrial-inhibited or dual-chamber pacing provides the best chance for preventing the development of chronic atrial fibrillation with its attendant risks of embolism and stroke. It is clear that AV synchrony has beneficial hemodynamic effects at rest in most patients. The results of Labovitz would suggest that in patients with marked left atrial enlargement, this may be less so. The results of Stewart et al would further suggest that in patients with retrograde VA conduction, dual-chamber pacing is preferable. Retrograde VA conduction can be intermittent and this makes it difficult to use its absence on a single test to decide on the type of pacemaker to use. It appears that baseline left ventricular function does not determine the relative improvement in cardiac output observed with AV synchrony or rate-adaptive pacing. However, in patients with severe congestive heart failure even a small improvement in cardiac output may result in significant clinical improvement. Studies have shown that in any given patient, there may be an optimal AV interval at rest. In general, this ranges from 100 to 150 milliseconds. In normal individuals the optimal AV interval shortens with increased heart rate during exercise in a predictable and linear fashion. The hemodynamic benefits of a shortened AV interval with faster heart rates in pacemaker patients have not yet been shown. Intuitively, however, this would appear to be a desirable approach and will probably be added to the design of future generations of dual-chamber pacemakers. Studies of the effect of different pacing modes on secretion of atrial natriuretic factor are intriguing and may contribute more to our understanding of pacing hemodynamics in the future. During exercise, heart rate increase is more important than AV synchrony and this has been shown by several studies. Thus, in active patients with chronotropic incompetence due to sick sinus syndrome, the addition of rate-adaptive pacing is important. Because single-chamber rate-adaptive atrial pacing leaves the patient exposed to the risk of future development of AV block and DDD pacing does not provide chronotropic support, it is likely that the new rate-adaptive dual-chamber (DDDR) devices will be used in a significant number of these patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)