Single- versus dual-chamber sensor-driven pacing: comparison of cardiac outputs
- PMID: 1877449
- DOI: 10.1016/0002-8703(91)90518-m
Single- versus dual-chamber sensor-driven pacing: comparison of cardiac outputs
Abstract
Previous studies have shown that single-chamber sensor-driven pacing improves exercise tolerance for patients with chronotropic incompetence. However, long-term single-chamber pacing has a number of inherent problems that limit its usefulness. Although sensor-driven dual-chamber pacing largely obviates the problems inherent with single-chamber sensor-driven pacing, the physiologic benefit of dual-chamber sensor-driven pacing has not yet been demonstrated. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to compare exercise-induced cardiac output for patients with chronotropic incompetence, after programming their pacemakers to either a simulated sensor-driven single or simulated dual-chamber mode. Cardiac output was measured noninvasively at rest and peak exercise using standard Doppler-derived measurements, obtained in a blinded fashion. At rest the Doppler-derived resting VVI and DDD cardiac outputs were 4.49 +/- 0.3 L/min and 4.68 +/- 0.3 L/min, respectively. At peak exercise, the DDD cardiac output was 5.07 +/- 0.5 L/min, whereas the simulated activity VVI and DDD cardiac outputs were 6.33 +/- 0.6 L/min and 7.41 +/- 0.70 L/min, respectively. Analysis of variance showed that there was an overall significant difference in cardiac output from rest to peak exercise (p less than 0.001). However, only the simulated activity DDD cardiac output was significantly different from its respective control value (p less than 0.05). Thus this study shows for the first time that the addition of rate responsiveness to dual-chamber pacing results in a significant improvement in cardiac output for patients with chronotropic incompetence.
Similar articles
-
Clinical and hemodynamic comparison of VVI versus DDD pacing in patients with DDD pacemakers.Am J Cardiol. 1988 Feb 1;61(4):323-9. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(88)90938-1. Am J Cardiol. 1988. PMID: 3341209 Clinical Trial.
-
Measurements of cardiac output by impedance cardiography in pacemaker patients at rest: effects of various atrioventricular delays.J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993 Mar 1;21(3):761-7. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(93)90110-m. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993. PMID: 8436759
-
Importance of heart rate response during exercise in patients using atrioventricular synchronous and ventricular pacemakers.Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1990 Jan;13(1):59-68. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1990.tb02004.x. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1990. PMID: 1689036
-
Cost benefit analysis of single and dual chamber pacing for sick sinus syndrome and atrioventricular block. An economic sensitivity analysis of the literature.Eur Heart J. 1996 Apr;17(4):574-82. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a014911. Eur Heart J. 1996. PMID: 8733091 Review.
-
AAI pacing mode: when is it indicated and how should it be achieved?Clin Cardiol. 1993 Apr;16(4):339-43. doi: 10.1002/clc.4960160409. Clin Cardiol. 1993. PMID: 8458114 Review.
Cited by
-
Dual chamber versus single chamber ventricular pacemakers for sick sinus syndrome and atrioventricular block.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;2004(2):CD003710. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003710.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004. PMID: 15106214 Free PMC article.
-
Sex differences in selection of pacemakers: retrospective observational study.BMJ. 1998 May 16;316(7143):1492-5. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7143.1492. BMJ. 1998. PMID: 9582133 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials