An optimized AV delay algorithm for patients with intermittent atrioventricular conduction

The Story of Managed Ventricular Pacing

A significant milestone in cardiac pacing occurred approximately two decades ago, when the primary operating mode was reimagined to more closely mimic normal top-down cardiac activation. When introduced, Managed Ventricular Pacing (MVP™; Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) was an unprecedented dual-chamber mode as it preferentially paced the right atrium in the AAI/R mode and simultaneously protected against transient heart block, albeit only in the instance of dropped ventricular beats. At the time, dual-chamber DDD/R with atrial-based timing and programmable atrioventricular delay was state of the art. MVP™ “unlocked” conventional dual-chamber pacing by not consistently requiring a 1:1 atrioventricular relationship during its primary operating mode (ie, AAI/R+). Ultimately, MVP™ emerged as a primitive means to promote His–Purkinje activation, and it is not a coincidence that its roots can be traced back to first-in-man permanent His-bundle pacing.

Minimizing right ventricular pacing in pacemaker patients with intact and compromised atrioventricular conduction : Results from the EVITA Trial

INTRODUCTION

Unnecessary ventricular pacing is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Over the years different algorithms have been developed to reduce right ventricular pacing.

OBJECTIVES

Goal of the present study was to test the efficacy of the ventricular intrinsic preference (VIP) algorithm in patients with atrioventricular intact (AVi) and atrioventricular compromised (AVc) AV-conduction.

METHODS

Evaluation of VIP feature in pacemaker patients (EVITA) was a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial (Trials.gov Identifier: NCT00366158). In total, 389 patients were randomized to AVc group: n = 140/132 VIP OFF/VIP On, AVi group: n = 54/63 VIP OFF/VIP ON). One-month post-implantation AV conduction testing (AVc: PR/AR interval > 210 ms) was performed. Follow-up visits occurred 6 and 12 months after DDD-pacemaker implantation.

RESULTS

In AVi and AVc-patients initiation of the VIP feature significantly reduced incidence of ventricular pacing (AVi: 53 ± 38 vs. 9 ± 21%, p = 0.0001; AVc: 79 ± 31 vs. 28 ± 35%, p = 0.0001). DDD-pacemaker implantation per se significantly reduced incidence of AF in VIP ON (AVi 27 vs. 0%, p < 0.0001; AVc 29 vs. 3%, p < 0.0001) and VIP OFF patients (AVi 43 vs. 4%, p < 0.0001; AVc 33 vs. 3, p < 0.0001), without significant differences between VIP ON and OFF groups (p > 0.05). In the AVc group activation of VIP significantly reduced incidence of adverse events (AE). All-cause mortality was not significantly different in VIP ON (n = 5) and VIP OFF (n = 4, p > 0.05) patients.

CONCLUSION

AV search hysteresis (VIP) markedly reduces ventricular pacing both in patients with normal AV conduction and in patients with prolonged PR interval or intermittent AV block.

Very Low Ventricular Pacing Rates Can Be Achieved Safely in a Heterogeneous Pacemaker Population and Provide Clinical Benefits: The CANadian Multi-Centre Randomised Study-Spontaneous AtrioVEntricular Conduction pReservation (CAN-SAVE R) Trial

BACKGROUND

It is well recognized that right ventricular apical pacing can have deleterious effects on ventricular function. We performed a head-to-head comparison of the SafeR pacing algorithm versus DDD pacing with a long atrioventricular delay in a heterogeneous population of patients with dual-chamber pacemakers.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In a multicenter prospective double-blinded randomized trial conducted at 10 centers in Canada, 373 patients, age 71±11 years, with indications for dual chamber DC pacemakers were randomized 1:1 to SafeR or DDD pacing with a long atrioventricular delay (250 ms). The primary objective was twofold: (1) reduction in the proportion of ventricular paced beats at 1 year; and (2) impact on atrial fibrillation burden at 3 years, defined as the ratio between cumulative duration of mode-switches divided by follow-up time. Statistical significance of both co-primary end points was required for the trial to be considered positive. At 1 year of follow-up, the median proportion of ventricular-paced beats was 4.0% with DDD versus 0% with SafeR (P<0.001). At 3 years of follow-up, the atrial fibrillation burden was not significantly reduced with SafeR versus DDD (median 0.00%, interquartile range [0.00% to 0.23%] versus median 0.01%, interquartile range [0.00% to 0.44%], respectively, P=0.178]), despite a persistent reduction in the median proportion of ventricular-paced beats (10% with DDD compared to 0% with SafeR).

CONCLUSIONS

A ventricular-paced rate <1% was safely achieved with SafeR in a population with a wide spectrum of indications for dual-chamber pacing. However, the lower percentage of ventricular pacing did not translate into a significant reduction in atrial fibrillation burden.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ Unique identifier: NCT01219621.

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.

Common pitfalls in interpreting pacemaker electrocardiograms in the emergency department

The number of patients receiving pacemakers and defibrillators has grown substantially over the last 20 years. In addition, the complexity and sophistication of these devices have increased, making diagnosis of pacemaker problems using the electrocardiogram (ECG) more difficult for clinicians in the emergency department. This article will focus on a few of the pitfalls to be avoided when interpreting paced ECGs. Pacemaker algorithms designed to minimize right ventricular pacing may be confused with pathologic failure to output. Automatic capture threshold detection schemes may be misinterpreted as failure to capture as well as undersensing due to the extra "backup" pacemaker spikes noted on rhythm strips. Device testing done in the emergency department may produce waveforms on monitor resembling ventricular tachycardia if pacemaker-mediated tachycardia is produced accidentally. Ventricular safety pacing algorithms may also be misinterpreted as failure to sense appropriately, triggering questions about pacemaker malfunction. Certain types of true undersensing may resemble morphologies consistent with pacemaker lead dislodgment. In addition, sophisticated programming features designed to mimic normal physiology could be misconstrued as pacemaker malfunction. These include pacemaker hysteresis and sleep mode. The presence of frequent premature ventricular complexes would cause a pacemaker to inhibit ventricular pacing appropriately. However, this could produce a palpated heart rate that is substantially lower than the programmed lower rate of the device due to reduced perfusion by the premature ventricular complexes, again raising questions about the appropriate functioning of the pacemaker. All of these situations will be discussed in detail along with approaches to systematically examining the paced ECGs to minimize the risk of misinterpretation. Pacemaker timing cycles as they relate to troubleshooting of the paced ECG will also be introduced.

Pacing features that mimic malfunction: a review of current programmable and automated device functions that cause confusion in the clinical setting

Modern implantable devices capable of pacing are armed with a multitude of programmable and automated features. While some features represent important advances in device safety and performance, many can also mimic device malfunction. This article discusses these features in terms of the confusion they may cause and highlights important clinical clues that aid in their recognition.

[Avoidance of ventricular pacing in patients with sinus node disease or intermittent AV block]

In patients with frequent right ventricular stimulation, worsening of heart failure and atrial fibrillation may occur. Avoidance of unnecessary right ventricular pacing is a major requirement for pacemaker selection and programming in patients with sinus node disease or intermittent AV block. In dual chamber pacemakers this goal can be achieved by programming a long AV delay or an AV delay hysteresis. Algorithms that allow AAI pacing in a dual chamber pacing mode and change to DDD mode in case of high degree AV block are a new attempt to avoid unnecessary right ventricular pacing. The article describes various strategies to avoid unnecessary ventricular pacing and discusses their advantages and disadvantages.

New developments in antibradycardic devices

With increasing advances in technology, cardiac pacemakers have become highly sophisticated devices that allow diagnostic and therapeutic functions beyond conventional antibradycardic therapy. This review discusses the most promising developments in antibradycardic device therapy, such as novel diagnostic functions, telemonitoring, autoadjustment of programmed parameters, algorithms for support of intrinsic atrioventricular conduction, pacing algorithms for the prevention of atrial arrhythmias and cardiac resynchronization therapy. A short overview of the basic principles of antibradycardic device therapy is also provided.

Reducing Unnecessary Right Ventricular Pacing with the Managed Ventricular Pacing Mode in Patients with Sinus Node Disease and AV Block

BACKGROUND

Frequent and unnecessary right ventricular apical pacing increases the risk of atrial fibrillation or congestive heart failure. We evaluated a new pacing algorithm, managed ventricular pacing (MVP) which automatically changes modes between AAI/R and DDD/R in patients receiving pacemakers for symptomatic bradycardia.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to the MVP mode or DDD/R mode for 1 month and then crossed over to the alternate pacing modality for an additional month. On completion of the crossover phase, the pacing mode selected was individualized and patients were followed for an additional 4 months.

RESULTS

Of the 129 patients who successfully completed the crossover study, the cumulative percent ventricular pacing was significantly reduced in the MVP mode (median 1.4%) compared to the DDD/R mode (median 89.6%, 94.0% relative reduction; 95% CI 89.3-98.8%, P < 0.001). Patients with sinus node disease (SND, n = 51) when compared to patients with AV block (AVB) (n = 68) experienced a greater reduction in ventricular pacing with the MVP mode compared to the DDD/R mode (median relative reduction 99.1%; 95% CI 97.5-99.9% vs median relative reduction 60.1%; 95% CI 16.7-93.9% P < 0.001). The reduced percent ventricular pacing during MVP was sustained over longer term follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients with a bradycardia indication for cardiac pacing do not require ventricular pacing most of the time. The MVP mode significantly reduces unnecessary right ventricular pacing. This mode benefits even patients with intermittent AVB and is sustained over longer term follow-up.

Reduction of Right Ventricular Pacing in Patients with Dual-Chamber ICDs

BACKGROUND

Unnecessary right ventricular (RV) pacing in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) may adversely affect heart failure morbidity and total mortality. Inhibition of Unnecessary RV Pacing with AV Search Hysteresis in ICDs (INTRINSIC RV) is a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial evaluating outcomes in ICD recipients programmed to single-chamber pacing (VVI) versus dual-chamber (DDDR) pacing with AV search hysteresis (AVSH).

METHODS

Patients underwent ICD implant (for standard indications). The ICD was programmed to DDDR with AVSH regardless of any need for pacing. Rate-adaptive pacing was set at 60-130 ppm with dynamic AV delay from 200 to 90 ms. AVSH was programmed to search every 32 intervals and extend the AV delay by 50%. One week post-implant patients with ICDs were interrogated to assess the percentage of RV pacing with the expectation that most would have <20% RV pacing and would be randomized into INTRINSIC RV. Early analysis showed that targets for randomization were not met. AVSH parameters were modified under a protocol amendment to increase AV delay extension to 100%. We report findings related to this programming change based upon analyses of (nonrandomized) data pre- and post-amendment.

RESULTS

Twenty-one percent of patients (n = 314) were enrolled pre-amendment and 79% (n = 1,216) were enrolled post-amendment. The mean percentage of RV pacing at the 1-week visit was 41.4 +/- 29.6% pre-amendment and 14.7 +/- 22.6% post-amendment (P < 0.0001). The proportion of patients eligible for randomization (RV pacing <20% at the 1-week visit) was 31.2% pre-amendment and 76.8% post-amendment (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

AVSH can dramatically reduce the percentage of RV pacing among ICD recipients.

Reduction of right ventricular pacing in patients with sinus node dysfunction using an enhanced search AV algorithm

BACKGROUND

Dual chamber pacing typically results in a high percentage of ventricular pacing. A number of studies have been conducted suggesting detrimental effects of ventricular desynchronization produced by long-term RV pacing. Pacemaker algorithms that extend the AV interval to uncover intrinsic AV conduction have been utilized to reduce ventricular pacing. These algorithms are often limited to AV intervals below 250 ms limiting the ventricular pacing reduction. We hypothesized that by allowing AV intervals to extend beyond 300 ms, a marked reduction in RV pacing can be achieved.

METHODS

A total of 30 patients (17 men, mean age 71 +/- 9) with standard Brady indications, and implanted with a Medtronic Kappa 700 pacemaker, were randomized to 2-week treatments with default Search AV (KSAV) parameters or Enhanced Search AV (ESAV) parameters. The Enhanced Search AV algorithm included the capability for continuous adjustment of AV delays and the ability to auto disable in patients with persistent AV block.

RESULTS

Among patients with intact AV conduction, percent VP was greater in KSAV versus ESAV (70 +/- 40% vs 19 +/- 28%, P < 0.001). In patients with persistent AV block, the algorithm suspended appropriately and there was no significant change in the percent VP between both arms of the study. In 18/22 patients, percent VP was reduced below 40%.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial reduction in ventricular pacing can be achieved by allowing the AV interval parameters to extend beyond 300 ms using the ESAV algorithm. In patients with AV block, ESAV suspended and patients were paced at their nominal settings.

Use of a new cardiac pacing mode designed to eliminate unnecessary ventricular pacing

AIMS

To examine the performance of AAIsafeR2, a new pacing mode to minimize the cumulative proportion of ventricular pacing in patients who do not need regular ventricular support.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The safety of AAIsafeR2 was examined in 123 recipients (73 +/- 12 years old, 51% men) of dual chamber pacemakers implanted for sinus node dysfunction, paroxysmal AV block or the bradycardia-tachycardia syndrome. Data were collected from pacemaker diagnostics, and the first 43 patients underwent 24-h Holter recordings before being discharged from the hospital with AAIsafeR2 activated. No adverse event related to AAIsafeR2 was observed. All ventricular pauses detected on Holter tapes triggered immediate back-up ventricular pacing. Appropriate switches to DDD occurred in 97 of 123 patients. In 69 of 123 devices (56%) switches to DDD were non-sustained, and the average % ventricular pacing in this group was 0.2+/-0.5%.

CONCLUSION

AAIsafeR2 mode seems to be safe and reliable in patients with infrequent slowing or pauses in ventricular activity, while maintaining ventricular pacing below 1%.

Controversies in pacing: Indications and programming

This article reviews controversies in cardiac pacing in four areas: methods to prevent unnecessary right ventricular pacing and optimal ventricular pacing sites in the bradycardia population, pacing for prevention of atrial fibrillation (AF), a novel pacing technique for the treatment of heart failure, and pacing for the treatment of sleep apnea. Frequent right ventricular pacing has been reported to increase the incidence of AF and congestive heart failure. However, many patients with pacemakers for bradycardia have intrinsic atrioventricular conduction most of the time. Optimal programming of pacemakers and new algorithms designed to reduce unnecessary ventricular pacing are discussed. Pacing algorithms for prevention of AF have generally been shown to be ineffective. Atrial antitachycardia pacing has been shown to reduce the burden of atrial tachyarrhythmias in selected patients. Cardiac contractility modulation has recently been reported to be a promising new approach to the treatment of heart failure. Some pacing techniques may be effective in the treatment of sleep apnea but larger, long-term clinical trials are required to demonstrate a significant clinical benefit.

Evaluation of Atrial Conduction Time at Various Sites of Right Atrial Pacing and Influence on Atrioventricular Delay Optimization by Surface Electrocardiography

Cardiac function and electrical stability may be improved by programming of optimal AV delay in DDD pacing. This study tested the hypothesis if the global atrial conduction time at various pacing sites can be derived from the surface ECG to achieve an optimal electromechanical timing of the left heart. Data were obtained from 60 patients following dual chamber pacemaker implantation. Right atrial septal pacing was associated with significantly shorter atrial conduction time (P < 0.0005) and P wave duration (P < 0.005), compared to standard right atrial pacing sites at the right atrial appendage or at the right free wall. The last two pacing sites showed no significant difference. In a group of 31 patients with AV block, optimal AV delay was achieved by programming a delay of 100 ms from the end of the paced P wave to peak/nadir of the paced ventricular complex. Optimization of AV delay resulted in a relative increase of echocardiographic stroke volume (SV) (10.9 +/- 13.7%; 95% CI: 5.9-15.9%) when compared to nominal AV delay (170 ms). Optimized AV delay was highly variable (range 130-250 ms; mean 180 +/- 35 ms). The hemodynamic response was characterized by a weak significant relationship between SV increase and optimized AV delay (R2 = 0.196, R = 0.443, P = 0.047). The study validated that septal pacing is advantageous for atrial synchronization compared to conventional right atrial pacing. Tailoring the AV delay with respect to the surface ECG improved systolic function significantly and was superior to nominal AV delay settings in the majority of patients.

Automated pacemaker function

Pacemakers have used automated functions since the introduction of the inhibited mode more than 30 years ago. Currently, virtually all aspects of pacemaker function are subject to automated control, including automated threshold tracking and sensitivity adjustment. These features are designed to enhance patient safety and quality of life, extend battery life, and simplify pacemaker programming and follow-up for health care providers. Many of these automated algorithms are still in evolution and the clinical benefits are not clearly demonstrated for all functions. Although pacemaker function will become increasingly automated, these features should not be accepted uncritically and without demonstrating benefit to the pacemaker patient.

How smart should pacemakers Be?

The concept of the "smart" pacemaker has been continuously changing during 40 years of progress in technology. When we talk today about smart pacemakers, it means optimal treatment, diagnosis, and follow-up for patients fitting the current indications for pacemakers. So what is smart today becomes accepted as "state of the art" tomorrow. Originally, implantable pacemakers were developed to save lives from prolonged episodes of bradycardia and/or complete heart block. Now, in addition, they improve quality of life via numerous different functions acting under specific conditions, thanks to the introduction of microprocessors. The devices have become smaller, with the miniaturization of the electrical components, without compromising longevity. Nevertheless, there are still some unmatched objectives for these devices, for example, the optimization of cardiac output and the management of atrial arrhythmias in dual-chamber devices. Furthermore, indications continue to evolve, which in turn require new, additional functions. These functions are often very complex, necessitating computerized programming to simplify application. In addition, the follow-up of these devices is time-consuming, as appropriate system performance has to be regularly monitored. A great many of these functions could be automatically performed and documented, thus enabling physicians and paramedical staff to avoid losing time with routine control procedures. In addition, modern pacemakers offer extensive diagnostic functions to help diagnose patient symptoms and pacemaker system problems. Different types of data are available, and their presentation differs from one company to the other. This huge amount of data can only be managed with automatic diagnostic functions. Thus, the smart pacemaker of the near future should offer high flexibility to permit easy programming of available therapies and follow-up, and extensive, easily comprehensible diagnostic functions.