Clinical comparison of acute single to dual chamber pacing in chronotropically incompetent patients with left ventricular dysfunction.

Dual chamber, rate responsive (DDDR) pacing is felt to he superior to ventricular, rate responsive (VVIR) pacing since it more closely mimics the normal electrical and hemodynamic activity of the heart. This reasoning has been used to justify the higher initial costs and increased complexity of dual...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Pacing & Clinical Electrophysiology Vol. 18; no. 3; pp. 433 - 441
Autores principales: Barrington WW, Windle JR, Easley AR Jr., Rundlett R, Eisenger G
Formato: Journal Article
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Mar1995
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=106037593&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 106037593
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        01478389
        4F8
      jtl: Pacing & Clinical Electrophysiology
      issn: 01478389
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Mar1995
      vid: 18
      iid: 3
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
      place: Malden, Massachusetts
    artinfo:
      ui:
        106037593
        2009412944
        NLM7770363
        106037593
      ppf: 433
      ppct: 8
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Clinical comparison of acute single to dual chamber pacing in chronotropically incompetent patients with left ventricular dysfunction.
      aug:
        au:
          Barrington WW
          Windle JR
          Easley AR Jr.
          Rundlett R
          Eisenger G
      sug:
      ab: Dual chamber, rate responsive (DDDR) pacing is felt to he superior to ventricular, rate responsive (VVIR) pacing since it more closely mimics the normal electrical and hemodynamic activity of the heart. This reasoning has been used to justify the higher initial costs and increased complexity of dual chamber systems. This study was designed to determine if objective criteria could be identified during acute testing to justify implanting a dual chamber instead of a single chamber system in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Eight patients with DDDR pacemakers (implanted for chronotropic incompetence) and left ventricular dysfunction underwent exercise radionuclide angiography and graded exercise treadmill testing. Each patient performed the tests in the single (VVIR) and dual (DDDR] chamber modes in a randomized, blinded fashion. We found that objective parameters such as ejection fraction (31% ± 13% vs 31% ± 10%), exercise tolerance (6.1 ± 2.7 min vs 6.3 ± 2.9 min), oxygen consumption (VO2) (941 ± 286 mL/min vs 994 ± 314 mL/min), carbon dioxide production (VCO2) (995 ± 332 mL/min vs 1054 ± 356 mL/min), and maximum attainable workload (43 ± 24 W vs 46 ± 22 W) did not differ between the single and dual chamber pacing modes. These findings suggest that in the acute setting, the additional cost and complexity of dual chamber, rate responsive pacing cannot be justified by objective improvements in exercise tolerance in patients with underlying left ventricular dysfunction.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N