Advertisement

Clinical characteristics of patients intolerant to VVIR pacing

      Abstract

      The incidence and clinical predictors of the development of intolerance to VVIR pacing have not been extensively studied in prospective long-term randomized trials comparing different pacing modes. The frequency and clinical factors predicting intolerance to ventricular pacing are controversial. The Pacemaker Selection in the Elderly (PASE) Trial enrolled 407 patients aged ≥65 years in a 30-month, single-blind, randomized, controlled comparison of quality of life and clinical outcomes with ventricular pacing and dual-chamber pacing in patients undergoing dual-chamber pacemaker implantation for standard clinically accepted indications. We reviewed the clinical, hemodynamic, and electrophysiologic variables at the time of pacemaker implantation in 204 patients enrolled in the PASE trial and randomized to the VVIR mode, some of whom subsequently required crossover (reprogramming) to DDDR pacing. During a median follow-up of 555 days, 53 patients (26%) crossed over from VVIR to DDDR pacing. A decrease in systolic blood pressure during ventricular pacing at the time of pacemaker implantation (p = 0.001), use of β blockers at the time of randomization (p = 0.01), and nonischemic cardiomyopathy (p = 0.04) were the only variables that predicted crossover in the Cox multivariate regression model. After reprogramming to the dual-chamber mode, patients showed improvement in all aspects of quality of life, with significant improvements in physical and emotional role. The high incidence of crossover from VVIR to DDDR pacing along with significant improvements in quality of life after crossover to DDDR pacing strongly favors dual-chamber pacing compared with single-chamber ventricular pacing in elderly patients requiring permanent pacing.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Cardiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Santini M.
        • Alexidou G.
        • Ansalone G.
        • Cacciatore G.
        • Cini R.
        • Turitto G.
        Relation of prognosis in sick sinus syndrome to age, conduction defects and modes of permanent cardiac pacing.
        Am J Cardiol. 1990; 65: 729-735
        • Markewwitz A.
        • Schad N.
        • Hemmer W.
        • Bernheim C.
        • Ciavolollela M.
        • Weihold C.
        What is the most appropriate stimulation mode in patients with sinus node dysfunction?.
        Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1986; 9: 1115-1120
        • Feuer J.
        • Shandling A.
        • Messenger J.
        • Castallanet C.
        • Thomas L.
        Influence of cardiac pacing mode on the long-term development of atrial fibrillation.
        Am J Cardiol. 1989; 64: 1376-1379
        • Sutton R.
        • Kenny R.A.
        The natural history of sick sinus syndrome.
        Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1986; 9: 1110-1114
        • Rosenqvist M.
        • Brandt J.
        • Schuller H.
        Long-term pacing in sinus node disease; the effects of stimulation mode on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
        Am Heart J. 1988; 116: 16-22
        • Stangl K.
        • Seitz K.
        • Wirtzfeld A.
        • Ah E.
        • Blomer H.
        Differences between atrial single chamber pacing (AAI) and ventricular single chamber pacing (VVI) with respect to prognosis and antiarrhythmic effect in patients with sick sinus syndrome.
        Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1990; 13: 2080-2085
        • Hesselson A.B.
        • Parsonnet V.
        • Bernstein A.D.
        • Bonavita G.L.
        Deleterious effects of long-term single chamber ventricular pacing in patients with sick sinus syndrome.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992; 17: 1542-1549
        • Connolly S.J.
        • Kerr C.
        • Gent M.
        • Yusuf S.
        Dual-chamber versus ventricular pacing.
        Circulation. 1996; 94: 578-583
        • Lamas G.A.
        Pacemaker mode selection and survival.
        Heart. 1997; 78: 218-220
        • Toff W.D.
        • Skehan J.D.
        • De Bono D.P.
        • Camm A.J.
        The United Kingdom pacing and cardiovascular events (UKPACE) trial.
        Heart. 1997; 78: 221-223
        • Ovsyhcher I.E.
        • Hayes D.L.
        • Furman S.
        Dual-Chamber pacing is superior to ventricular pacing. Fact or Controversy?.
        Circulation. 1998; 97: 2368-2370
        • Andersen H.R.
        • Thuesen L.
        • Bagger J.P.
        • Vesterlund T.
        • Bloch-Thomsen P.E.
        Prospective randomized trial of atrial versus ventricular pacing in sick sinus syndrome.
        Lancet. 1994; 344: 1523-1528
        • Lamas G.A.
        • Orav E.J.
        • Stambler B.S.
        • Ellenbogen K.A.
        • Sgarbossa E.B.
        • Huang S.K.S.
        • Marinchak R.A.
        • Estes III, N.A.M.
        • Mitchell G.F.
        • Lieberman E.H.
        • Mangione C.M.
        • Goldman L.
        Quality of life and clinical outcomes in elderly patients treated with ventricular pacing as compared with dual-chamber pacing.
        N Engl J Med. 1998; 338: 1097-1104
        • Asubel K.
        • Furman S.
        The pacemaker syndrome.
        Ann Intern Med. 1985; 103: 420-429
        • Ellenbogen K.A.
        • Gilligan D.M.
        • Wood M.A.
        • Morillo C.A.
        • Barold S.S.
        The pacemaker syndrome—a matter of definition.
        Am J Cardiol. 1997; 79: 1226-1229
        • Nishimura R.A.
        • Gersh B.J.
        • Vliestra R.E.
        • Osborn M.J.
        • Ilstrup D.M.
        • Holmes D.R.
        Hemodynamic and symptomatic consequences of ventricular pacing.
        PACE. 1982; 5: 903-910
        • Heldman D.
        • Mulvihill D.
        • Nguyen H.
        • Messenger J.C.
        • Rylaarsdam A.
        • Evans K.
        • Castellanet M.J.
        True incidence of pacemaker syndrome.
        PACE. 1990; 13: 1742-1750
        • Sulke N.
        • Chambers J.
        • Dritsas A.
        • Sowton E.
        A randomized double-blind crossover comparison of four rate-responsive pacing modes.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991; 17: 696-706
        • Sulke N.
        • Dritsas A.
        • Bostock J.
        • Wells A.
        • Morris R.
        • Sowton E.
        “Subclinical” pacemaker syndrome.
        Br Heart J. 1992; 67: 57-64
        • Stewart W.J.
        • Dicola V.C.
        • Harthorne J.W.W.
        • Gilliam L.D.
        • Weyman A.E.
        Doppler ultrasound measurement of cardiac output in patients with physiologic pacemakers.
        Am J Cardiol. 1984; 54: 308-312
        • Rediker D.E.
        • Eagle K.A.
        • Homma S.
        • Gillam L.D.
        • Harthorne J.W.
        Clinical and hemodynamic comparison of VVI versus DDD pacing inpatients with DDD pacemakers.
        Am J Cardiol. 1988; 61: 323-329
        • Sorrrentino R.A.
        • Wharton J.M.
        • DeAntonio H.
        • Natale A.
        • Brodine W.
        • Steinhaus D.
        • Hafley G.
        • Lee K.L.
        • Pacemaker Atrial Tachycardia Trial Investigators
        Pacemaker syndrome in the Pacemaker Atrial Tachycardia Trial.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999; 33 (abstr): 141A
        • Ellenbogen K.A.
        • Wood M.A.
        • Stambler B.
        Pacemaker syndrome.
        in: Barold S.S. Mugica J. New Perspectives in Cardiac Pacing. Vol. 3. Futura Publishing, Mount Kisco, NY1993: 85-112
        • Pearson A.C.
        • Janosik D.L.
        • Redd R.M.
        • Buckingham T.A.
        • Labovitz A.J.
        Hemodynamic benefit of atrioventricular synchrony.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 1989; 13: 1613-1621
        • Ellenbogen K.A.
        • Thames M.D.
        • Mohanty P.K.
        New insights into pacemaker syndrome gained from hemodynamic, humoral and vascular responses during ventriculo-atrial pacing.
        Am J Cardiol. 1990; 65: 53-59
        • Taylor J.A.
        • Morillo C.A.
        • Eckberg D.L.
        • Ellenbogen K.A.
        Higher sympathetic nerve activity during ventricular (VVI) pacing than dual chamber (DDD) pacing.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996; 28: 1753-1758
        • Stagl K.
        • Weil J.
        • Seitz K.
        • Laule M.
        • Gerzer R.
        Influence of AV synchrony on the plasma level of atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) in patients with total AV block.
        PACE. 1988; 11: 1176-1181
        • Erlebacher J.A.
        • Danner R.L.
        • Stelzer P.E.
        Hypotension with ventricular pacing.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984; 4: 550-555
        • Mittleman R.S.
        • Orav E.J.
        • Goldman L.
        • Ellenbogen K.A.
        • Huang S.
        • Lamas G.A.
        Effects of mode changing from single chamber to dual chamber pacing on quality of life in the elderly.
        PACE. 1998; 21 (abstr): 934