Clinical Value of Algorithms of Minimization of Right Ventricular Pacing in Patients With Sick Sinus Syndrome and History of Atrial Fibrillation

Purpose: to assess effectiveness of algorithms of minimization of right ventricular pacing (MRVP) for prevention of progression of atrial fibrillation (AF), lowering of frequency of hospitalizations due to cardiovascular causes, and mortality in patients with sick sinus syndrome (SSS) and history of paroxysmal AF compared with standard compared with dual-chamber pacing (DDDR). Materials and methods. We included in this single-center prospective study 74 consecutive patients with indications to permanent DDDR pacing be cause of SSS combined with documented history of paroxysmal AF. Patients were randomized in the groups of DDDR pacing (n=36) and with activated algorithms of MRVP (n=38). Pacemaker check up was made after 6 months during 1 year after device implantation. Primary composite endpoint included development of persistent AF, hospitalization due to cardiovascular causes, and all cause death. Results. During follow-up there was no statistically significant difference in achievement of the primary endpoint (27.8 and 18.4% in groups of DDDR pacing and activated algorithms of MRVP respectively (relative risk 1.29% confidence interval 0.43 to 3.86; p=0.25). Rate of development of persistent AF in both groups was comparable (8.6 and 5.3% in DDDR and MRVP groups, respectively; p=0.47). Median AF burden was 6.0 (0;42) and 6.0 (0;42) min/day in DDDR and MRVP groups, respectively (p=0.67). Conclusion. Our study failed to demonstrate advantages of the use of algorithms of decreasing “unmotivated” right ventricular pacing over standard regimen of standard DDDR pacing in patients with SSS and history of paroxysmal AF.

синдром слабости синусного узла, фибрилляция предсердий, двухкамерный электрокардиостимулятор, минимизация правожелудочковой стимуляции, sick sinus syndrome, atrial fibrillation, dual-chamber pacemaker, right ventricular pacing minimization

1. Brignole M., Auricchio A., Baron-Esquivias G. et al. 2013 ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy. The Task Force on cardiac pacing and resynchronization therapy of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA). Eur Heart J. 2013;34:2281-2329.

2. Nielsen J. C., Thomsen P. E., Hojberg S. et al; DANPACE Investigators. A comparison of single-lead atrial pacing with dual-chamber pacing in sick sinus syndrome. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:686-696.

3. Sweeney M. O., Hellkamp A. S., Ellenbogen K. A. et al. 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 2003;107:2932-2937.

4. Sweeney M. O., Bank A. J., Nsah E. et al. Minimizing ventricular pacing to reduce atrial fibrillation in sinus-node disease. N. Engl J. Med 2007;357:1000-1008.

5. Healey J. S., Connolly S.J., Gold M. R. et al.; ASSERT Investigators. Subclinical atrial fibrillation and the risk of stroke. N. Engl J. Med 2012;366:120-129.

6. Israel C. W. Analysis of mode switching algorithms in dual chamber pacemakers. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2002;25:380-393.

7. Purerfellner H., Gillis A. M., Holbrook R. et al. Accuracy of atrial tachyarrhythmia detection in implantable devices with arrhythmia therapies. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2004;27:983-992.

8. Lang R. M., Bierig M., Devereux R. B. et al. Recommendations for chamber quantification: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography»s Guidelines and Standards Committee and the Chamber Quantification Writing Group, developed in conjunction with the European Association of Echocardiography, a branch of the European Society of Cardioligy. J. Am SocEchocardiogr 2005;18:1440-1463.

9. Lang R. M., Badano L. P., Mor-Avi V. et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J. Am Soc Echocardiogr 2015;28:1-39.

10. Kirchhof P., Benussi S., Kotecha D. et al. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:2893-2962.

11. Boriani G., Tukkie R., Manolis A. S. et al. Atrial antitachycardia pacing and managed ventricular pacing in bradycardia patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial tachyarrhythmias: the MINERVA randomized multicentre international trial. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2352-2362.

12. Nielsen J. C., Thomsen PE. B., Hojberg S. et al. Atrial fibrillation in patients with sick sinus syndrome: the association with PQ-interval and percentage of ventricular pacing. Europace 2012;14:682-689.