» Articles » PMID: 25179761

Long-term Clinical Effects of Ventricular Pacing Reduction with a Changeover Mode to Minimize Ventricular Pacing in a General Pacemaker Population

Overview
Journal Eur Heart J
Date 2014 Sep 3
PMID 25179761
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Aim: Right ventricular pacing (VP) has been hypothesized to increase the risk in heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF). The ANSWER study evaluated, whether an AAI-DDD changeover mode to minimize VP (SafeR) improves outcome compared with DDD in a general dual-chamber pacemaker population.

Methods And Results: ANSWER was a randomized controlled multicentre trial assessing SafeR vs. standard DDD in sinus node disease (SND) or AV block (AVB) patients. After a 1-month run-in period, they were randomized (1 : 1) and followed for 3 years. Pre-specified co-primary end-points were VP and the composite of hospitalization for HF, AF, or cardioversion. Pre-specified secondary end-points were cardiac death or HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular hospitalizations. ANSWER enrolled 650 patients (52.0% SND, 48% AVB) at 43 European centres and randomized in SafeR (n = 314) or DDD (n = 318). The SafeR mode showed a significant decrease in VP compared with DDD (11.5 vs. 93.6%, P < 0.0001 at 3 years). Deaths and syncope did not differ between randomization arms. No significant difference between groups [HR = 0.78; 95% CI (0.48-1.25); P = 0.30] was found in the time to event of the co-primary composite of hospitalization for HF, AF, or cardioversion, nor in the individual components. SafeR showed a 51% risk reduction (RR) in experiencing cardiac death or HF hospitalization [HR = 0.49; 95% CI (0.27-0.90); P = 0.02] and 30% RR in experiencing cardiovascular hospitalizations [HR = 0.70; 95% CI (0.49-1.00); P = 0.05].

Conclusion: SafeR safely and significantly reduced VP in a general pacemaker population though had no effect on hospitalization for HF, AF, or cardioversion, when compared with DDD.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of ventricular pacing suppression algorithms in dual chamber pacemaker: Results of "LEADER" study.

Hwang J, Han S, Park H, Chung T, Jung M, Park S J Arrhythm. 2024; 40(4):965-974.

PMID: 39139897 PMC: 11317712. DOI: 10.1002/joa3.13117.


Systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact on outcomes of device algorithms for minimizing right ventricular pacing.

Mei D, Imberti J, Vitolo M, Bonini N, Serafini K, Mantovani M Europace. 2024; 26(8).

PMID: 39120658 PMC: 11346371. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euae212.


The impact of permanent pacemaker implantation on long-term survival after cardiac surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sakurai Y, Mehaffey J, Kuno T, Yokoyama Y, Takagi H, Denning D J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2024; 169(3):896-906.e14.

PMID: 38657782 PMC: 11493848. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2024.04.024.


U-Shaped Association Between Monocyte-Lymphocyte Ratio and Risk of Cardiac Conduction Block.

Li M, Li X, Gao H, Li P, Zhang L, Zhang X J Inflamm Res. 2023; 16:5393-5402.

PMID: 38026237 PMC: 10664808. DOI: 10.2147/JIR.S438722.


2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure.

Chung M, Patton K, Lau C, Dal Forno A, Al-Khatib S, Arora V J Arrhythm. 2023; 39(5):681-756.

PMID: 37799799 PMC: 10549836. DOI: 10.1002/joa3.12872.


References
1.
Botto G, Ricci R, Benezet J, Nielsen J, De Roy L, Piot O . Managed ventricular pacing compared with conventional dual-chamber pacing for elective replacement in chronically paced patients: results of the Prefer for Elective Replacement Managed Ventricular Pacing randomized study. Heart Rhythm. 2014; 11(6):992-1000. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2014.01.011. View

2.
Savoure A, Frohlig G, Galley D, Defaye P, Reuter S, Mabo P . A new dual-chamber pacing mode to minimize ventricular pacing. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2005; 28 Suppl 1:S43-6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2005.00095.x. View

3.
Kindermann M, Hennen B, Jung J, Geisel J, Bohm M, Frohlig G . Biventricular versus conventional right ventricular stimulation for patients with standard pacing indication and left ventricular dysfunction: the Homburg Biventricular Pacing Evaluation (HOBIPACE). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006; 47(10):1927-37. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.12.056. View

4.
Davy J, Hoffmann E, Frey A, Jocham K, Rossi S, Dupuis J . Near elimination of ventricular pacing in SafeR mode compared to DDD modes: a randomized study of 422 patients. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2012; 35(4):392-402. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2011.03314.x. View

5.
Boriani G, Tukkie R, Manolis A, Mont L, Purerfellner H, Santini M . 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(35):2352-62. PMC: 4163193. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu165. View