Pacing in sinus node disease to prevent atrial fibrillation

References

• Nielsen JC, Thomsen PE, Højberg S et al.; DANPACE Investigators. A comparison of single-lead atrial pacing with dual-chamber pacing in sick sinus syndrome. Eur. Heart J. 32(6), 686–696 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamas GA, Lee KL, Sweeney MO et al.; Mode Selection Trial in Sinus-Node Dysfunction. Ventricular pacing or dual-chamber pacing for sinus-node dysfunction. N. Engl. J. Med. 346(24), 1854–1862 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen HR, Nielsen JC, Thomsen PE et al. Long-term follow-up of patients from a randomised trial of atrial versus ventricular pacing for sick-sinus syndrome. Lancet 350(9086), 1210–1216 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connolly SJ, Kerr CR, Gent M et al. Effects of physiologic pacing versus ventricular pacing on the risk of stroke and death due to cardiovascular causes. Canadian Trial of Physiologic Pacing Investigators. N. Engl. J. Med. 342(19), 1385–1391 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweeney MO, Bank AJ, Nsah E et al.; Search AV Extension and Managed Ventricular Pacing for Promoting Atrioventricular Conduction (SAVE PACe) Trial. Minimizing ventricular pacing to reduce atrial fibrillation in sinus-node disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 357(10), 1000–1008 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Go AS, Hylek EM, Phillips KA et al. Prevalence of diagnosed atrial fibrillation in adults: national implications for rhythm management and stroke prevention: the AnTicoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) Study. JAMA 285(18), 2370–2375 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toff WD, Camm AJ, Skehan JD; United Kingdom Pacing and Cardiovascular Events Trial Investigators. Single-chamber versus dual-chamber pacing for high-grade atrioventricular block. N. Engl. J. Med. 353(2), 145–155 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healey JS, Connolly SJ, Gold MR et al.; ASSERT Investigators. Subclinical atrial fibrillation and the risk of stroke. N. Engl. J. Med. 366(2), 120–129 (2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen HR, Thuesen L, Bagger JP, Vesterlund T, Thomsen PE. Prospective randomised trial of atrial versus ventricular pacing in sick-sinus syndrome. Lancet 344(8936), 1523–1528 (1994).
   Google Scholar
• Lamas GA, Orav EJ, Stambler BS et al. Quality of life and clinical outcomes in elderly patients treated with ventricular pacing as compared with dual-chamber pacing. Pacemaker Selection in the Elderly Investigators. N. Engl. J. Med. 338(16), 1097–1104 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamas GA, Knight JD, Sweeney MO et al. Impact of rate-modulated pacing on quality of life and exercise capacity–evidence from the Advanced Elements of Pacing Randomized Controlled Trial (ADEPT). Heart Rhythm 4(9), 1125–1132 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Haïssaguerre M, Jaïs P, Shah DC et al. Spontaneous initiation of atrial fibrillation by ectopic beats originating in the pulmonary veins. N. Engl. J. Med. 339(10), 659–666 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iwasaki YK, Nishida K, Kato T, Nattel S. Atrial fibrillation pathophysiology: implications for management. Circulation 124(20), 2264–2274 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanagala T, Johnston SL, Groot GD, Santucci P, Rhine DK, Varma N. Left atrial mechanical responses to right ventricular pacing in heart failure patients: implications for atrial fibrillation. J. Cardiovasc. Electrophysiol. 22(8), 866–874 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vardas PE, Auricchio A, Blanc JJ et al.; European Society of Cardiology; European Heart Rhythm Association. Guidelines for cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy: The Task Force for Cardiac Pacing and Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association. Eur. Heart J. 28(18), 2256–2295 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein AE, Dimarco JP, Ellenbogen KA et al.; American College of Cardiology; American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines; American Association for Thoracic Surgery; Society of Thoracic Surgeons. ACC/AHA/HRS 2008 Guidelines for device-based therapy of cardiac rhythm abnormalities. Heart Rhythm 5(6), e1–e62 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Papageorgiou P, Monahan K, Boyle NG et al. Site-dependent intra-atrial conduction delay. Relationship to initiation of atrial fibrillation. Circulation 94(3), 384–389 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuchert A, Rebeski HP, Peiffer T et al.; 3:4 Study Group. Effects of continuous and triggered atrial overdrive pacing on paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in pacemaker patients. Pacing Clin. Electrophysiol. 31(8), 929–934 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Papageorgiou P, Monahan K, Anselme F, Kirchhof C, Josephson ME. Electrophysiology of atrial fibrillation and its prevention by coronary sinus pacing. Semin. Interv. Cardiol. 2(4), 227–232 (1997).
   Google Scholar
• Wang M, Siu CW, Lee KL et al. Effects of right low atrial septal vs. right atrial appendage pacing on atrial mechanical function and dyssynchrony in patients with sinus node dysfunction and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Europace 13(9), 1268–1274 (2011).
   Google Scholar
• Prinzen FW, Hunter WC, Wyman BT, McVeigh ER. Mapping of regional myocardial strain and work during ventricular pacing: experimental study using magnetic resonance imaging tagging. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 33(6), 1735–1742 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barold SS. Repetitive reentrant and non-reentrant ventriculoatrial synchrony in dual chamber pacing. Clin. Cardiol. 14(9), 754–763 (1991).
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen JC, Pedersen AK, Mortensen PT, Andersen HR. Programming a fixed long atrioventricular delay is not effective in preventing ventricular pacing in patients with sick sinus syndrome. Europace 1(2), 113–120 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blanc JJ, De Roy L, Mansourati J et al.; PIPAF Investigators. Atrial pacing for prevention of atrial fibrillation: assessment of simultaneously implemented algorithms. Europace 6(5), 371–379 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Carlson MD, Ip J, Messenger J et al.; Atrial Dynamic Overdrive Pacing Trial (ADOPT) Investigators. A new pacemaker algorithm for the treatment of atrial fibrillation: results of the Atrial Dynamic Overdrive Pacing Trial (ADOPT). J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 42(4), 627–633 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Ricci R, Santini M, Puglisi A et al. Impact of consistent atrial pacing algorithm on premature atrial complexe number and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation recurrences in brady-tachy syndrome: a randomized prospective cross over study. J. Interv. Card. Electrophysiol. 5(1), 33–44 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gold MR, Adler S, Fauchier L et al.; SAFARI Investigators. Impact of atrial prevention pacing on atrial fibrillation burden: primary results of the Study of Atrial Fibrillation Reduction (SAFARI) trial. Heart Rhythm 6(3), 295–301 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Sulke N, Silberbauer J, Boodhoo L et al. The use of atrial overdrive and ventricular rate stabilization pacing algorithms for the prevention and treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the Pacemaker Atrial Fibrillation Suppression (PAFS) study. Europace 9(9), 790–797 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell AR, Spurrell PA, Cheatle L, Sulke N. Effect of atrial antitachycardia pacing treatments in patients with an atrial defibrillator: randomised study comparing subthreshold and nominal pacing outputs. Heart 87(5), 433–437 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Lee MA, Weachter R, Pollak S et al.; ATTEST Investigators. The effect of atrial pacing therapies on atrial tachyarrhythmia burden and frequency: results of a randomized trial in patients with bradycardia and atrial tachyarrhythmias. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 41(11), 1926–1932 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailin SJ, Adler S, Giudici M. Prevention of chronic atrial fibrillation by pacing in the region of Bachmann’s bundle: results of a multicenter randomized trial. J. Cardiovasc. Electrophysiol. 12(8), 912–917 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Padeletti L, Pieragnoli P, Ciapetti C et al. Randomized crossover comparison of right atrial appendage pacing versus interatrial septum pacing for prevention of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in patients with sinus bradycardia. Am. Heart J. 142(6), 1047–1055 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Padeletti L, Pürerfellner H, Adler SW et al.; Worldwide ASPECT Investigators. Combined efficacy of atrial septal lead placement and atrial pacing algorithms for prevention of paroxysmal atrial tachyarrhythmia. J. Cardiovasc. Electrophysiol. 14(11), 1189–1195 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hermida JS, Kubala M, Lescure FX et al. Atrial septal pacing to prevent atrial fibrillation in patients with sinus node dysfunction: results of a randomized controlled study. Am. Heart J. 148(2), 312–317 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Verlato R, Botto GL, Massa R et al. Efficacy of low interatrial septum and right atrial appendage pacing for prevention of permanent atrial fibrillation in patients with sinus node disease: results from the electrophysiology-guided pacing site selection (EPASS) study. Circ. Arrhythm. Electrophysiol. 4(6), 844–850 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattioli AV, Vivoli D, Mattioli G. Influence of pacing modalities on the incidence of atrial fibrillation in patients without prior atrial fibrillation. A prospective study. Eur. Heart J. 19(2), 282–286 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healey JS, Toff WD, Lamas GA et al. Cardiovascular outcomes with atrial-based pacing compared with ventricular pacing: meta-analysis of randomized trials, using individual patient data. Circulation 114(1), 11–17 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweeney MO, Hellkamp AS, Ellenbogen KA et al.; MOde Selection Trial Investigators. Adverse effect of ventricular pacing on heart failure and atrial fibrillation among patients with normal baseline QRS duration in a clinical trial of pacemaker therapy for sinus node dysfunction. Circulation 107(23), 2932–2937 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elkayam LU, Koehler JL, Sheldon TJ, Glotzer TV, Rosenthal LS, Lamas GA. The influence of atrial and ventricular pacing on the incidence of atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Pacing Clin. Electrophysiol. 34(12), 1593–1599 (2011).
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen JC, Kristensen L, Andersen HR, Mortensen PT, Pedersen OL, Pedersen AK. A randomized comparison of atrial and dual-chamber pacing in 177 consecutive patients with sick sinus syndrome: echocardiographic and clinical outcome. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 42(4), 614–623 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Padeletti L, Pontecorboli G, Michelucci A, Mond HG. AAIR or DDDR pacing for sick sinus syndrome: the physiologic conundrum. Europace 14(6), 781–782 (2012).
   Google Scholar
• Albertsen AE, Nielsen JC, Poulsen SH et al. Biventricular pacing preserves left ventricular performance in patients with high-grade atrio-ventricular block: a randomized comparison with DDD® pacing in 50 consecutive patients. Europace 10(3), 314–320 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Chan JY, Fang F, Zhang Q et al. Biventricular pacing is superior to right ventricular pacing in bradycardia patients with preserved systolic function: 2-year results of the PACE trial. Eur. Heart J. 32(20), 2533–2540 (2011).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Funck RC, Blanc JJ, Mueller HH, Schade-Brittinger C, Bailleul C, Maisch B; BioPace Study Group. Biventricular stimulation to prevent cardiac desynchronization: rationale, design, and endpoints of the ‘Biventricular Pacing for Atrioventricular Block to Prevent Cardiac Desynchronization (BioPace)’ study. Europace 8(8), 629–635 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng S, Keyes MJ, Larson MG et al. Long-term outcomes in individuals with prolonged PR interval or first-degree atrioventricular block. JAMA 301(24), 2571–2577 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nielsen JC, Thomsen PE, Højberg S et al.; on behalf of the DANPACE investigators. Atrial fibrillation in patients with sick sinus syndrome: the association with PQ-interval and percentage of ventricular pacing. Europace 14(5), 682–689 (2012).
   Google Scholar
• Ellenbogen KA, Stambler BS, Orav EJ et al. Clinical characteristics of patients intolerant to VVIR pacing. Am. J. Cardiol. 86(1), 59–63 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Link MS, Hellkamp AS, Estes NA 3rd et al.; MOST Study Investigators. High incidence of pacemaker syndrome in patients with sinus node dysfunction treated with ventricular-based pacing in the Mode Selection Trial (MOST). J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 43(11), 2066–2071 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellenbogen KA, Hellkamp AS, Wilkoff BL et al. Complications arising after implantation of DDD pacemakers: the MOST experience. Am. J. Cardiol. 92(6), 740–741 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkfeldt RE, Johansen JB, Nohr EA, Moller M, Arnsbo P, Nielsen JC. Risk factors for lead complications in cardiac pacing: a population-based cohort study of 28,860 Danish patients. Heart Rhythm 8(10), 1622–1628 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johansen JB, Jørgensen OD, Møller M, Arnsbo P, Mortensen PT, Nielsen JC. Infection after pacemaker implantation: infection rates and risk factors associated with infection in a population-based cohort study of 46299 consecutive patients. Eur. Heart J. 32(8), 991–998 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poole JE, Gleva MJ, Mela T et al.; REPLACE Registry Investigators. Complication rates associated with pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator replacements and upgrade procedures: results from the REPLACE registry. Circulation 122(16), 1553–1561 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Brien BJ, Blackhouse G, Goeree R et al. Cost–effectiveness of physiologic pacing: results of the Canadian Health Economic Assessment of Physiologic Pacing. Heart Rhythm 2(3), 270–275 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Deniz HB, Caro JJ, Ward A, Moller J, Malik F. Economic and health consequences of managing bradycardia with dual-chamber compared to single-chamber ventricular pacemakers in Italy. J. Cardiovasc. Med. (Hagerstown) 9(1), 43–50 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Caro J, Ward A, Moller J. Modelling the health benefits and economic implications of implanting dual-chamber vs. single-chamber ventricular pacemakers in the UK. Europace 8(6), 449–455 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Rinfret S, Cohen DJ, Lamas GA et al. Cost–effectiveness of dual-chamber pacing compared with ventricular pacing for sinus node dysfunction. Circulation 111(2), 165–172 (2005).
   Google Scholar