Quality of Life and Clinical Outcomes in Elderly Patients Treated with Ventricular Pacing as Compared with Dual-Chamber Pacing

Increased percentage of Atrial Pace Ventricular Pace was associated with increased cardiovascular morality in patients with a DDD pacemaker

“…Compared to single-chamber ventricular pacemaker, DDD pacemaker has an important advantage because it more closely resembles cardiac physiology by maintaining AV synchrony. Hence, it might decrease cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and may prolong survival and improve quality of life [4,5]. Hence, in recent real-world practice, DDD pacemaker is a favor one unless patients have permanent atrial fibrillation.…”

“…Pacemaker technology permits the use of either single-chamber ventricular pacemakers or dual-chamber pacemakers (DDD) for patients without permanent atrial fibrillation who require cardiac pacing. Compared to single-chamber pacing, dualchamber pacing more closely resembles cardiac physiology by maintaining atrioventricular (AV) synchrony and thus reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality [1][2][3] and improves quality of life [4,5].…”

The impact of NICE (UK) recommendations on outcomes of cardiac pacemaker implantations – a single‐centre, district hospital experience

“…In their multivariate analysis, the atrial group was significantly associated with freedom from thromboembolic events [relative risk (RR) 0.47, 95% CI 0.24–0.92, P = 0.028] and survival from cardiovascular death (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.30–0.91, P = 0.022) [6]. In the Pacemaker Selection in the Elderly, the Canadian Trial of Physiological Pacing (CTOPP), the Mode Selection Trial in Sinus Node Dysfunction (MOST) and the United Kingdom Pacing and Cardiovascular Events trial, there was no clear mortality benefit of dual‐chamber pacing over ventricular pacing [7–11]. Although both CTOPP and MOST showed a significant reduction in AF with dual‐chamber pacing, no reduction of stroke was observed.…”

Příspěvek k článku Jiřího Spáčila a Jana Petráška: Kardiostimulace v některých pražských nemocnicích v posledních letech, který byl otištěn v Cor et Vasa 2007;49(1):35-36. Výběr stimulačního režimu u nemocných indikovaných k implantaci kardiostimulátoru

“…V dalších letech tedy otázka zněla: Je lepší jednodutinový komorový systém nebo dvoudutinový systém zachovávající fyziologickou AV sekvenci? Na tuto otázku se snažily odpovědět čtyři velké randomizované studie: PASE, (4) CTOPP, (5) MOST (6) a jako poslední UKPACE. (7) Studie PASE publikovaná v roce 1998 byla primárně zaměřena na kvalitu života.…”