Filiz Akyıldız AKÇAY, Rustem YILMAZ, Murat YEŞİL

The effects of pacing mode on development of chronic AF in patients undergoing pacemaker implantation due to AV block : A retrospective study

Permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent arrhythmia among elderly patients. Permanent AF may cause thromboembolic events, heart failure, poor quality of life and recurrent hospitalizations. The effects of pacemaker mode on developing permanent AF have been investigated in several studies. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of physiological pacing (DDD) and non-physiological pacing (VVI) on the development of permanent AF in patients undergoing pacemaker implantation due to AV block who initially had a sinus rhythm and did not have significant coronary artery disease (CAD). We included 148 patients who underwent permanent cardiac pacemaker implantation (67 VVI and 81 DDD) due to AV block. All patients had P wave activity before pacemaker insertion, and none had significant CAD on coronary angiography. Trans thoracic echocardiography and a 12 lead ECG of each patient were performed. Of 148 patients who were included in the study, 81 had DDD pacemaker and 67 had VVI pacemaker. There were 72 women (48.6%) and 76 men (51.4%). The mean age was 67±7 years. Mean follow-up time was 5.7±1.8 years. Permanent AF developed in 16 (10.8%) patients. Age, gender, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, initial LA diameter, and LV ejection fraction were not statistically the difference between two groups. Pacemaker mode was the unique variable that reached statistical significance (p=0.003). Permanent AF developed in 13 (19.4%) patients and in 3 (3.7%) patients in VVI and DDD pacemaker groups, respectively (p=0.003). The comparison of initial and follow-up echocardiographic parameters such as change in LA diameters, LV ejection fractions, and LV end-systolic and end-diastolic diameters revealed that merely the change in LA diameters was statistically significant between the patients who developed permanent AF and who did not. In this study, we found that pacemaker mode significantly leads to the development of permanent AF. The risk of developing permanent AF was 7-8 times greater in the VVI group than that in the DDD group. Neither mode had effects on ventricular systolic functions. However, the mean left atrial diameter was significantly higher in the VVI group. According to these results, we suggest the insertion of a DDD pacemaker for the patient with P wave activity and AV block.

PDF

___

1. Elmqvist R, Senning A. İmplantable pacemaker for the heart. In: Smyth CN (ed). Medical Electronics: Proceedings of the second International Conference on Medical Electronics, Paris, 24-27 June 1959, London, UK: Iliffe & Sons; 1960:253–4.
2. Furman S, Robinson G. The use of an intracardiac pacemaker in the correction of total heart block. Surg Forum. 1958;9:245-8.
3. Toff WD, Camm AJ, Skchan JD et al. For the United Kingdom Pacing and Cardiovascular Events (UKPACE) Trial Investigators. Single-chamber versus dual-ehamber pacing for high-grade atrioventricular block. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:145-55.
4. Andersen HR, Thuesen L, Bagger JP et al. Prospective randomised trial of atrial versus ventricular pacing in sick-sinus syndrome. Lancet. 1994;344:1523-8.
5. Kerr CR, Connolly SJ, Abdollah H et al. Canadian Trial of Physiological Pacing: effects of physiological pacing during long-term follow-up. Circulation. 2004;109:357-62.
6. Lamas GA, Lee KL, Sweeney MO et al. Ventricular pacing or dual-chamber pacing for sinus-node dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1854-62.
7. 7. Skanes AC, Krahn AD, Yee R et al. Progression to chronic atrial fibrillation after pacing: the Canadian Trial of Physiologic Pacing. CTOPP Investigators. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38:167-72.
8. Tang AS, Roberts RS, Kerr C et al. Relationship between pacemaker dependency and the effect of pacing mode on cardiovascular outcomes. Circulation. 2001;103:3081-5.
9. Nielsen JC, Andersen HR, Thomsen PE et al. Heart failure and echocardiographic changes during long-term follow-up of patients with sick sinus syndrome randomized to single-chamber atrial or ventricular pacing. Circulation. 1998;97:987-5.
10. Lamas GA, Orav EJ, Stambler BS et al. Quality of life and clinical outcomes in elderly patients treated with ventricular pacing as compared with dualchamber pacing. Pacemaker Seleetion in the Elderly Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:1097-104.
11. 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. 2000;342:1385-91.
12. Pastore G, Zanon F, Baracca E et al. The risk of atrial fibrillation during right ventricular pacing. Eur Soc Cardiol. 2016; 18: 353-8
13. Ravi V, Beer D, Pietrasik GM et al. Development of new‐onset or progressive atrial fibrillation in patients with permanent his bundle pacing versus right ventricular pacing: results from the RUSH HBP registry. J Am Heart Asoc. 2020:1-13
14. Pastore G, Marcantoni L, Lanza D et al. Occurrence of persistent atrial fibrillation during pacing for sinus node disease: The influence of His bundle pacing versus managed ventricular pacing. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32:110-6
15. Lyon X, Kappenberger L, Sedmcra D et al. Pacing redistributes glycogen within the developing myocardium. Mol Cell Cardiol 2001;33:513-20.
16. Rosa A, Maury JP, Terrand J et al. Ectopic pacing at physiological rate improves postanoxic recovery of the developing heart. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2003;284:2384-92.