Suppression of atrial tachyarrhythmias by pacing

The place of hybrid therapies with drugs to supplement nonpharmacological therapies in atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most common cardiac arrhythmias, and its prevalence continues to rise as the aged population increases. Comparative studies of rhythm control and rate control have been equivocal; however, the benefits of rhythm control may have been offset by the limitations of antiarrhythmic drugs. More recently, nonpharmacological therapies have emerged that provide hope of more effective rhythm control. Catheter ablation techniques have gained favour with high success rates in specialized centers, although these techniques are not without complications and require considerable expertise. Pacing therapies designed to reduce harmful right ventricular pacing and increase physiological pacing have shown benefit in AF patients with bradycardia. Despite this progress, no single modality confers benefit for all patients. Strategies to combine these treatment modalities in a hybrid approach has shown increasing promise for subgroups of AF patients.

Diagnostic tools for atrial tachyarrhythmias in implantable pacemakers: a review of technical options and pitfalls

BACKGROUND

Correct pacemaker (PM) diagnosis of paroxysmal atrial tachyarrhythmias is crucial for their prevention and intervention with specific atrial pacing programmes. The PM mode switch to only ventricular pacing after detection of atrial tachyarrhythmias is often used as the parameter to quantify the 'burden' of atrial tachyarrhythmias.

OBJECTIVES

This review addresses potential errors in the detection and diagnosis of atrial tachyarrhythmias, sometimes resulting in incorrect mode switches. The interpretation of PM-stored data of patients with atrial tachyarrhythmias and the results of trials of pace prevention and intervention can be better appreciated with more insight into the technical options and pitfalls.

RESULTS

Literature and clinical experience demonstrate that the correctness of PM-derived diagnosis of atrial tachyarrhythmias depends on 1) the sensitivity setting to detect the onset and perpetuation of atrial tachyarrhythmias frequently characterised by variable and low-voltage signals, 2) the rejection of far-field R wave sensing by the atrial sense amplifier, 3) the facility for verification of mode switches by a high-quality intracardiac registration of the nonmodified atrial electrogram. The configuration of the atrial lead also contributes to the diagnostic performance of the PM.

CONCLUSION

Not only pacing algorithms and diverse technical PM features but also the atrial lead configuration are currently the limiting factors to the fully reliable, automated detection and diagnosis of atrial tachyarrhythmias. If these technical shortcomings can be improved, better signal processing will result. Then atrial pacing to prevent or suppress atrial tachyarrhythmias will be more justified. (Neth Heart J 2008;16:201-10.).

Rationale and patient selection for "hybrid" drug and device therapy in atrial and ventricular arrhythmias

Three quite different forms of direct antiarrhythmic therapy are available for the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias: antiarrhythmic drugs, cardiac ablation and implantable devices (pacemakers and defibrillators). None of these therapies is fully effective and consequently they are increasingly combined. This combination therapy is often described as "hybrid" a term that implies fundamental different qualities of treatment which together provide some form of synergism. The mechanisms for the initiation and perpetuation of most cardiac arrhythmias are complex and multiple. It is therefore not surprising that single therapies are not completely effective. Theoretically the use of multiple different therapies allows more specific mechanisms of arrhythmia to be directly addressed. However, this is largely a theoretical concept that has only been strictly evaluated in a small number of studies. Studies of multiple therapies are difficult to perform unless the combination therapy is regarded as a strategy which can be compared to baseline, conventional treatment or one or more single constituent therapies from the combination. Despite the lack of formal studies there is a very substantial clinical experience which testifies to the value of hybrid therapy for the management of both atrial fibrillation and ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation.

Pacing to prevent atrial fibrillation

INTRODUCTION

Pacing has been proposed as a nonpharmacologic treatment option to prevent atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATs) in drug-refractory patients. This article reviews the current state of pacing to prevent ATs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Different pacing modalities have been assessed with regard to their ability to prevent AT: conventional DDDR pacing with elevated lower rate limit, biatrial pacing, dual-site right atrial pacing, atrial septal pacing, and pacing with the use of dedicated pacing algorithms. Small studies suggest a benefit of conventional pacing for AT prevention in patients with bradycardia, but a randomized trial did not reveal any AT reduction by conventional pacing in patients without bradycardia. AT prevention by biatrial or dual-site right atrial pacing has been reported in small studies, but randomized trials did not show a clear benefit of these pacing techniques. Small studies showed a reduced AT recurrence rate in patients with septal pacing at the triangle of Koch or at Bachmann's bundle. Two large randomized trials with preventive pacing algorithms showed a significant AT reduction compared to conventional pacing, but this was not confirmed in four trials.

CONCLUSION

Pacing seems to be able to suppress ATs in a minority of patients; however, prospective identification of responders to different pacing modalities does not appear to be feasible at the present time.