Document Detail

An update on clinical trials in pacing: is dual chamber pacing better?
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  14688628     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: As pacemaker technology has increased in complexity and now offers a variety of additional capabilities, there is uncertainty as to which pacing mode offers more benefit-dual-chamber or single-chamber. RECENT FINDINGS: Two large-scale randomized trials, the Canadian Trial of Physiologic Pacing and the Mode Selection Trial, demonstrated that dual-chamber pacing does not reduce the incidence of stroke or improve survival when compared with ventricular pacing. However, dual-chamber pacing does reduce the incidence of atrial fibrillation and in patients with sinus node dysfunction, reduces heart failure symptoms when compared with ventricular pacing. The modest results of these trials were unexpected when viewed in the context of the very favorable retrospective studies. SUMMARY: A rethinking of the physiology of cardiac pacing has led to the concept that although atrioventricular synchrony supports an improvement in cardiac output and ventricular pressures, these favorable hemodynamics may be attenuated by ventricular dyssynchrony from right ventricular apical pacing. In patients with a reduced ejection fraction, this dyssynchrony may be especially detrimental. Two trials (DANPACE and SAVE-PACE) are currently underway that will clarify the clinical significance of reducing forced ventricular desynchronization. The results of these trials may direct pacemaker physicians away from the right ventricular apical lead toward a new imperative of atrioventricular and right ventricular-left ventricular synchrony.
Steven J Hussein; Charles H Hennekens; Gervasio A Lamas
Related Documents :
19602028 - Synchronous ventricular pacing without crossing the tricuspid valve or entering the cor...
6476948 - Improved cardiovascular hemodynamics with atrioventricular sequential pacing compared w...
21092058 - Acute mechanical effect of right ventricular pacing at different sites using velocity v...
15191778 - Limited thoracotomy as a second choice alternative to transvenous implant for cardiac r...
20626338 - A link between hypertension and atrial fibrillation: methods of treatment and prevention.
19557148 - Quantitative evaluation of the amount of delayed myocardial enhancement as a predictor ...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Current opinion in cardiology     Volume:  19     ISSN:  0268-4705     ISO Abbreviation:  Curr. Opin. Cardiol.     Publication Date:  2004 Jan 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2003-12-22     Completed Date:  2004-06-03     Revised Date:  2007-11-15    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  8608087     Medline TA:  Curr Opin Cardiol     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  12-8     Citation Subset:  IM    
Cardiovascular Research Institute, Mount Sinai Medical Center and Miami Heart Institute, Miami Beach, Florida 33140, USA.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Arrhythmia, Sinus / therapy
Arrhythmias, Cardiac / therapy*
Cardiac Pacing, Artificial / methods*,  standards
Decision Making
Evaluation Studies as Topic
Pacemaker, Artificial / classification,  standards
Prosthesis Design
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Survival Rate
Treatment Outcome

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Autonomic aspects of arrhythmogenesis: the enduring and the new.
Next Document:  Pacemaker and defibrillator lead extraction.