Evaluation of a new rate adaptive ventricular pacemaker controlled by double sensors

Rate adaptive pacing in people with chronic heart failure increases peak heart rate but not peak exercise capacity: a systematic review

Rate adaptive cardiac pacing (RAP) allows increased heart rate (HR) in response to metabolic demand in people with implantable electronic cardiac devices (IECD). The aim of this work was to conduct a systematic review to determine if RAP increases peak exercise capacity (peak VO₂) in line with peak HR in people with chronic heart failure. We conducted a systematic literature search from 1980, when IECD and RAP were first introduced, until 31 July 2021. Databases searched include PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, EBSCO, and the Clinical Trials Register. A comprehensive search of the literature produced a total of 246 possible studies; of these, 14 studies were included. Studies and subsequent analyses were segregated according to comparison, specifically standard RAP (RAPON) vs fixed rate pacing (RAPOFF), and tailored RAP (TLD RAPON) vs standard RAP (RAPON). Pooled analyses were conducted for peak VO₂ and peak HR for RAPON vs RAPOFF. Peak HR significantly increased by 15 bpm with RAPON compared to RAPOFF (95%CI, 7.98-21.97, P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between pacing mode for peak VO₂ 0.45 ml kg^-1 min^-1 (95%CI, - 0.55-1.47, P = 0.38). This systematic review revealed RAP increased peak HR in people with CHF; however, there was no concomitant improvement in peak VO₂. Rather RAP may provide benefits at submaximal intensities by controlling the rise in HR to optimise cardiac output at lower workloads. HR may be an important outcome of CHF management, reflecting myocardial efficiency.

Contemporary pacemakers: what the primary care physician needs to know

Pacemaker therapy is most commonly initiated because of symptomatic bradycardia, usually resulting from sinus node disease. Randomized multicenter trials assessing the relative benefits of different pacing modes have made possible an evidence-based approach to the treatment of bradyarrhythmias. During the past several decades, major advances in technology and in our understanding of cardiac pathophysiology have led to the development of new pacing techniques for the treatment of heart failure in the absence of bradycardia. Left ventricular or biventricular pacing may improve symptoms of heart failure and objective measurements of left ventricular systolic dysfunction by resynchronizing cardiac contraction. However, emerging clinical data suggest that long-term right ventricular apical pacing may have harmful effects. As the complexity of cardiac pacing devices continues to grow, physicians need to have a basic understanding of device indications, device function, and common problems encountered by patients with devices in the medical and home environment.

Is a Dual-Sensor Pacemaker Appropriate in Patients with Sino-Atrial Disease? Results from the DUSISLOG Study

BACKGROUND

Rate-responsive pacemakers (PMs) are often supplied with accelerometer (XL) and minute ventilation (MV) sensors to provide a physiologic rate response according to patient needs. No information is available about the real benefit of dual-sensor rate-responsive pacing on the daily life of patients.

METHODS

DUSISLOG (Dual Sensor vs Single Sensor comparison using patient activity LOGbook) is a two-arm prospective, randomized, multicenter study that enrolled 105 patients who received a rate-responsive PM (Insignia), Guidant Corp.). After 1 month of DDD pacing at 60 ppm lower rate, a single sensor (XL or MV, randomized) was activated for 3 months at the manufacturer's suggested nominal settings, followed by a 3-month period with dual sensors optimized with automatic response. During the last month of each period, the following data concerning patient physical activity were retrieved from PM diagnostics (Activity Log): mean percentage of physical activity, mean intensity of activity. Quality of life (QoL) scores and 6-minute walk test (WT) were also recorded.

RESULTS

Single-sensor rate-responsive pacing resulted in symptomatic benefit equally with XL and MV sensors while no additional benefit was found using dual sensor. In a subgroup analysis, patients (17%) with marked chronotropic incompetence and with 0% atrial sensing received benefits from single sensor with an additional advantage from sensor (QoL: +21 +/- 14% P < 0.05; WT: +17 +/- 7% P < 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In most patients with rate-responsive devices, a single sensor is sufficient to achieve a satisfactory rate response. A dual sensor combination and optimization provides an additional benefit only in a selected population with an advanced atrial chronotropic disease.

Comparison of the cardiopulmonary response to exercise in recipients of dual sensor DDDR pacemakers Versus a Healthy control group

The authors previously have shown in healthy subjects that age related loss of muscular strength did not alter the chronotropic response during treadmill exercise, whether with sudden onset of effort, as in the chronotropic assessment exercise protocol (CAEP) or more gradual effort as in the Harbor exercise protocol. This study was performed to verify that in patients suffering from chronotropic insufficiency, and in absence of other effort-limiting disorders, "physiologic" pacing enables a cardiorespiratory response comparable to that of age-matched healthy subjects. Furthermore, the aim of the study was to confirm that the response of a new dual sensor-based pacing system was properly adapted to the metabolic demand, whether during CAEP or during Harbor test, by subjecting patients to both protocols. All study participants were able to undergo treadmill exercise testing, had normal cardiopulmonary function tests at rest, and no cardiac, muscular, or pulmonary disease. A healthy group (control) included 16 subjects (mean age 70.4 +/- 3.9 years), and the test group (pacemaker [PM] included 9 subjects (mean age 67.1 +/- 10.8 years) permanently paced for isolated chronotropic insufficiency with a dual sensor pacing system. All subjects underwent CAEP and Harbor tests with measurements of gas exchange, 24 hours apart, in randomized order. All subjects reached an appropriate level of exercise, as expressed by mean lactate plasma concentrations, which were slightly higher in the control than the PM group during CAEP (4.9 +/- 1.9 vs 3.7 +/- 1.9 mmol/L, NS) and Harbor (5.3 +/- 1.9 vs. 3.8 +/- 1.8 mmol/L, P < 0.05) tests. No statistical difference was observed in VO2 and VE at peak exercise between the two groups during either test. In the PM group, heart rate at peak exercise and metabolic reserve slope were higher during the CAEP than the Harbor protocol. These two measurements were significantly lower than in the control group. The PM group also had lower plasma lactate concentrations and dyspnea/fatigue scores. The Harbor test seems less suitable than the CAEP test to study the chronotropic response of pacemakers with dual sensors during exercise. A high performance of the new dual sensor-based pulse generator was confirmed in this physically fit patient population, whose peak heart rate was considerably higher than in other similar studies.

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.

Developments in sensor-driven pacing

This article reviews the recent major developments in the field of rate adaptive pacing. Including, the improved instrumentation of existing sensors, the use of multiple sensors to enhance sensor specificity or sensitivity, and the automation of sensor calibration. The physiologic benefits and programming of rate adaptive pacing are reviewed.

Evaluation of a dual sensor rate responsive pacing system based on a new concept. French Talent DR Pacemaker Investigators

The minute ventilation is known to be one of the most physiological indicators of exercise. A curvilinear relationship between VE and the normal sinus rhythm (NSR) has been demonstrated in healthy patients. The aim of this study is to show that a pacemaker based on a VE sensor can reproduce such a relationship. Eighty-one patients received a Talent DR 213 (ELA Medical, Montrouge, France) pacemaker with a third-generation rate responsive algorithm. At 1-month follow-up, the patients underwent a treadmill exercise test, after which three groups were defined: group 1 had 6 patients who were 100% paced throughout the exercise test; group 2 had 10 patients who maintained NSR throughout the test; and group 3 had 12 patients who had cardiopulmonary recording during the exercise test. In group 1 patients, the simulation function computed the simulated rate (sim-rate), which was compared to the sensor-driven rate (SDR). In group 2 patients, sim-rate was compared to the NSR. In group 3 patients, cardiac and metabolic reserves were compared to determine the appropriateness of the rate response to exercise (HRR% vs MR%). The results showed that the mean correlation coefficient between sim-rate and SDR was 0.983 +/- 0.005 (P < 0.001); the mean correlation coefficient between NSR and SDR was 0.92 +/- 0.07 (P < 0.001); and a linear relationship was found between HRR% and MR%, with a mean slope of 1.1 +/- 0.2 that was significantly equal to the theoretical value of 1 (P = NS). In conclusion, combining an activity-driven sensor with a physiological sensor allows the preservation of a physiological rate response during exercise.

An integrated dual sensor system automatically optimized by target rate histogram

The use of combined sensors and advanced algorithms using different principles can improve rate performance over a single sensor system. Combinations of sensors and more sophisticated algorithms, however, invariably increase the complexity of pacemaker programming. An automatically optimized combined minute ventilation and activity DDDR pacemaker was developed to minimize repeated sensor adjustment. The device used subthreshold (below cardiac stimulation threshold) lead impedance to detect lead configuration at implantation automatically, followed by "implant management," including setting of lead polarity and initiation of DDDR pacing. Automatic sensor adaptation was achieved by programming a "target rate histogram" based on the patient's activity level and frequency of exertion, and the rate profile optimization process matched the recorded integrated sensor response to the target rate histogram profile. In nine patients implanted with the DX2 pacemakers, the implant management gave 100% accuracy in the detection of lead polarity. Rate profile optimization automatically increased the pacing rate during exercise between discharge and 3-month follow-up (hall walk: 78 +/- 3 vs 98 +/- 3 beats/min, and maximal treadmill exercise: 89 +/- 6 vs 115 +/- 5 beats/min, P < 0.001) with a significant increase in exercise duration during maximal exercise (7.18 +/- 1 min vs 9.56 +/- 2 min, P = 0.05). The accuracy of rate profile optimization versus manual programming was assessed at 1 month, and there was no significant difference between pacing rate kinetics and maximal pacing rate between the two methods of programming. In conclusion, pacemaker automaticity can be initiated at implantation and the self-optimized rate adaptive response appeared to be comparable to that derived from a manual programming procedure, which may reduce the need to perform time consuming sensor programming.

Cardiac output is a sensitive indicator of difference in exercise performance between single and dual sensor pacemakers

Although multisensor pacing may compensate the inadequacy of rate adaptation in a single sensor system, the clinical role of multisensor driven rate adaptive pacing remains unclear. We compared the performance between single sensor and dual sensor driven pacemakers using exercise cardiac output (CO) as a marker of cardiac performance. Eight patients with a mean age of 63 +/- 3 years implanted with a dual sensor pacemaker driven by combined activity (ACT) and QT interval sensors were studied in the ACT-, QT- only and the dual QT + ACT-VVIR modes. Patients performed submaximal and maximal exercise tests with CO assessed by carbon dioxide rebreathing method. Comparing the HR response based on the change in metabolic workload, the ACT-VVIR "overpaced," the QT-VVIR "underpaced," and the QT + ACT-VVIR achieved the best approximation to normal. The percentages of CO increase in ACT-VVIR and QT + ACT-VVIR modes over resting CO were higher at 1 minute of exercise (295 +/- 85% and 165 +/- 49%, respectively) compared to the QT-VVIR mode (81 +/- 40%, P < or = 0.05). During exercise, stroke volume changes from baseline were similar between ACT-VVIR and QT + ACT-VVIR modes, but a compensatory increase in stroke volume occurred in the QT-VVIR mode during submaximal exercise (50 +/- 11 mL vs 24 +/- 17 mL in the QT + ACT-VVIR and 14 +/- 4 in ACT-VVIR, P < or = 0.003). There was no difference in the maximal exercise workload, exercise duration and CO at the submaximal and maximal exercise between the 3 sensor modes. Thus, exercise capacity is a poor indicator of sensor performance while CO measurement is a sensitive indicator of sensor mode differences especially at low workload exercise. The ACT-VVIR gave the fastest increase in CO at start of exercise at the expanse of overpacing, whereas the "under-paced" QT-VVIR compensated for the slower rate increase by utilizing contractility reserve during submaximal exercise. Dual sensor pacing, by achieving the best heart rate to workload relationship, provided a CO response without overpacing or using contractility reserve during exercise.

Contemporary issues in rate-adaptive pacing

This review addresses a number of questions pertaining to contemporary rate-adaptive pacemakers that include the role of dual sensor systems, sensor blending and cross-checking, automaticity, nonrate-related sensor functions, prevention of arrhythmias, and several other areas of clinical importance.

Vibration, acceleration, gravitation, and movement: activity controlled rate adaptive pacing during treadmill exercise testing and daily life activities

Activity-based sensors for rate adaptive pacing have been available for several years and now include several different types: vibration; acceleration; gravitation; and movement. However, a systematic comparison evaluating the relative advantages and disadvantages of these various sensors has received little study. The purpose of the present study was to compare these sensor subtypes using treadmill testing and an outdoor test circuit, which simulated daily life activities and included both uphill and downhill walking. Pacemakers were strapped on the chest of healthy volunteers and connected to one channel of an ambulatory recording device, which also recorded the subject's intrinsic heart rate. The pacemakers were programmed using an initial treadmill test to standardize the rate responsive parameters for each device. Nine different pacemaker models were studied including 3 vibration-based (Elite, Synchrony, Metros), 4 acceleration-based (Relay, Excel, Ergos, Trilogy), 1 gravitational-based (Swing), and 1 movement-based (Sensorithm) device. All devices demonstrated a prompt rate response with casual walking on flat ground. The vibration-, gravitational-, and movement-based pacemakers showed a pronounced rate decline during more strenuous work, e.g., walking uphill. This phenomenon was absent in the accelerometer-based units. In particular, the vibration- and movement-based units showed a higher rate with walking downhill compared to uphill. An optimally tuned rate behavior on the treadmill usually did not provide an optimal rate behavior during daily activities and there was a tendency to overstimulation during low workload. The development of the two newest sensors (gravitational and movement) did not result in an improved performance of rate response behavior. Overall, the accelerometer-based pacemakers simulated or paralleled sinus rate behavior the most closely.

Comparison of continuously recorded sensor and sinus rates during daily life activities and standardized exercise testing: efficacy of automatically optimized rate adaptive dual sensor pacing to simulate sinus rhythm

The normal sinus rhythm remains the gold standard to compare the rate response of a rate adaptive pacemaker. The aim of this study was to assess an automatically optimized dual sensor system by continuous comparison of the normal sinus (SR) and sensor indicated rates (SIR). Twelve patients with complete heart block (mean age 60 +/- 9 years) with normal sinus rhythm received a dual sensor pacemaker driven by combined, automatically adaptive activity and QT sensors. After 1 month of automatic adaptation, patients performed a treadmill exercise in the VDD mode with simultaneous collection of SR and combined SIR. Thereafter the difference between SR and SIR was recorded over a 1-month period using a software downloaded into the pacemakers, with the patients ambulatory during this period. During exercise testing, the SR and SIR were significantly correlated (r = 0.96 +/- 0.02, P < 0.001), and the mean difference between SR and SIR was 4.01 +/- 4.47 beats/min. The percentages of paced beats, over the 1 month ambulatory period, that exhibited a difference between SR and SIR of 8 beats/min were 98% +/- 2%, 90% +/- 4% and 67% +/- 8% for low, medium, and high workloads, respectively (P < 0.05, ANOVA), whereas > 95% of SIR were within 15 beats/min of SR independent of the level of activities. Thus, an automatically programmed dual sensor gives an accurate reflection of SR during exercise. SIR was less accurate for more vigorous daily life activities, but most of the SIR were within the normal SR variation of 15 beats/min.