Long‐Term RV Threshold Behavior by Automated Measurements: Safety is the Standpoint of Pacemaker Longevity!

Biffi, Mauro; Bertini, Matteo; Mazzotti, Antonio; Gardini, Beatrice; Mantovani, Vilma; Ziacchi, Matteo; Valzania, Cinzia; Martignani, C.; Diemberger, Igor; Boriani, Giuseppe

doi:10.1111/j.1540-8159.2010.02915.x

Cited by 25 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, our follow-up lasted only 1 year and a further increase of atrial pacing threshold could occur as demonstrated by Biffi et al . [7] for ventricular threshold in 6.8% of patients beyond 1 year. In this event, the automatic adjustment of atrial amplitude could improve safety for patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility of Atrial AutoCapture™ to Detect Atrial Evoked Response

Qin

Zhao

et al. 2017

Chinese Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Atrial AutoCapture™ (ACap™) was a new technological development that confirmed atrial capture by analyzing evoked response (ER) with a new method – paced depolarization integral ER detection – and optimized energy output to changes in the stimulation threshold. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of ACap™ function.Methods:This was a prospective, observational, nonrandomized two-center study. Between November 2008 and August 2014, 102 patients were enrolled from two different institutions. Data were collected by case report forms at enrollment, hospital discharge, and in-office follow-ups scheduled at 1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 months postimplantation.Results:Ambulatory ACap™ function started to become available for 20.6% of patients at 1 day, then progressed to 30.4% at 7 days, 38.6% at 1 month, 41.6% at 2 months, 47.5% at 3 months, 53.5% at 6 months, and 63.4% at 1 year. The cause of the unsuccessful attempts to perform ACap™ threshold was ER/polarization <2:1. Availability for SD, BND, and HOCM indications had shown better results than AVB indication. For SD indication cases, feasibility was significantly better for SD with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (pAF) than SD without pAF (78.4% vs. 35.0% at 1 year, n = 71, P < 0.001). At each stage of the clinical follow-ups, there had been a strict correlation between ACap™ measurements and those conducted manually with P < 0.001 (n = 299).Conclusions:It has been concluded that ACap™ function was safe and effective to confirm atrial threshold and reduce energy output automatically. ACap™ function is unavailable for some patients at early stages of the implantation; however, availability has been progressively increasing during follow-up.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility of Atrial AutoCapture™ to Detect Atrial Evoked Response

Qin

Zhao

et al. 2017

Chinese Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most studies regarding automated threshold testing review ventricular threshold testing. This was found to be safe and improve longevity . However, not much is published about automated atrial threshold testing, especially for Biotronik devices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ventricular Fibrillation due to Automated Atrial Threshold Testing in a Patient with an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator

Schellevis

Halm

2015

Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Automatic verification of capture and output management were a breakthrough innovation brought in clinical practice 25 years ago, that lead to increased patient safety and pacemaker (PM) longevity, with greater benefit at high pacing thresholds . Nowadays, these algorithms are available in PM and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices, and have specificities in terms of beat‐to‐beat capture verification, evoked response (ER) detection vs conduction to another cardiac chamber, maximum capture threshold that can be managed by automated capture verification, possibility to work at different pulse widths or with differently manufactured leads in relation to their polarization (low vs high) .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%