» Articles » PMID: 29908371

Addition of Minute Ventilation to Rate-response Pacing Improves Heart Rate Score More Than Accelerometer Alone

Overview
Journal Heart Rhythm
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2018 Jun 17
PMID 29908371
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Heart rate score (HRSc) ≥70%, a novel parameter, predicts risk of mortality in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and identifies patients who have survival benefit with DDDR vs DDD pacing.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine if DDDR pacing lowers HRSc, and a blended sensor with minute ventilation (MV) and accelerometer (XL) improves HRSc more than accelerometer (XL) alone in patients requiring pacemakers (PMs).

Methods: HRSc, the percentage of all beats in the tallest 10-beat/min device histogram bin, was calculated. Data from the Limiting Chronotropic Incompetence for Pacemaker Recipients Study, a prospective randomized trial of PM patients, comparing XL to blended-sensor (XL + MV) rate-responsive pacing, were analyzed retrospectively for HRSc changes from baseline. The relationship of patient activity (sensor-detected from device memory) to HRSc was examined.

Results: Of the 501 randomized patients, 215 (43%) patients had HRSc ≥70% during DDD pacing at baseline. In these patients, HRSc decreased after DDDR programming by 14.2%, while it increased by 0.4% in those with baseline HRSc <70% (n = 286) (HRSc ≥70% vs HRSc <70%; P < .01). No differences were detected between the 2 randomized sensor-based groups at baseline. Blended-sensor (MV + XL) programming reduced HRSc more than the XL sensor alone (MV + XL: 18% vs XL: 10%; P < .001). No correlation was observed between patient activity and HRSc (correlation = -0.14; P = .07).

Conclusion: HRSc improved (reduced) with rate-response (DDDR) programming in PM patients with high HRSc during DDD pacing. Blended sensors (MV + XL) improved HRSc more than XL alone. HRSc does not correlate with patient activity levels, suggesting that other patient factors determine this parameter. This programming approach needs to be investigated prospectively in a PM outcomes trial.

Citing Articles

Comparison of the left ventricular dyssynchrony between stylet-driven and lumen-less lead technique in left bundle branch area pacing using myocardial perfusion scintigraphy.

Miyajima K, Urushida T, Tomida Y, Tamura T, Masuda S, Okazaki A Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2023; 13(10):6840-6853.

PMID: 37869287 PMC: 10585528. DOI: 10.21037/qims-23-357.


Rate-Responsive Cardiac Pacing: Technological Solutions and Their Applications.

Swierzynska E, Oreziak A, Glowczynska R, Rossillo A, Grabowski M, Szumowski L Sensors (Basel). 2023; 23(3).

PMID: 36772467 PMC: 9920425. DOI: 10.3390/s23031427.


Heart rate score, a measure related to chronotropic incompetence in pacemaker patients.

Sharma A, Richards M, Olshansky B, Wold N, Jones P, Perschbacher D Heart Rhythm O2. 2021; 2(2):124-131.

PMID: 34113914 PMC: 8183967. DOI: 10.1016/j.hroo.2021.02.002.


Impact of a poor functional capacity on the clinical outcomes in patients with a pacemaker implantation -Results from the Japanese Heart Rhythm Society Registry.

Arimoto T, Watanabe E, Kohno R, Shimeno K, Kikuchi K, Doi A J Arrhythm. 2021; 37(1):182-188.

PMID: 33664901 PMC: 7896460. DOI: 10.1002/joa3.12459.