Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2019
Effect of PR interval and pacing mode on persistent atrial fibrillation incidence in dual chamber pacemaker patients: a sub-study of the international randomized MINERVA trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Boriani Giuseppe, Pieragnoli Paolo, Botto Giovanni Luca, Puererfellner Helmut, Mont Lluis, Ziacchi Matteo, Manolis Antonis S, Gulizia Michele, Tukkie Raymond, Landolina Maurizio, Ricciardi Giuseppe, Cicconelli Manuele, Grammatico Andrea, Biffi Mauro
Аннотация
AIMS: Per standard of care, dual-chamber pacemakers are programmed in DDDR mode with fixed atrioventricular (AV) delay or with long AV delay to minimize ventricular pacing. We aimed to evaluate whether the PR interval may be a specific criterion of choice between standard DDDR, to preserve AV synchrony in long PR patients, and managed ventricular pacing (MVP), to avoid ventricular desynchronization imposed by right ventricle apical pacing, in short PR patients.
METHODS AND RESULTS: In the MINERVA trial, 1166 patients were randomized to Control DDDR, MVP, or atrial anti-tachycardia pacing plus MVP (DDDRP + MVP). We evaluated the interaction of PR interval with pacing mode by comparing the risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) longer than 7 consecutive days as a function of PR interval. Out of 906 patients with available data, the median PR interval was 180 ms. The PR interval was found to significantly (P = 0.012) interact with pacing mode for AF incidence: the risk of AF > 7 days was lower [hazard ratio (HR) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.34-0.99; P = 0.047] in patients with short PR (shorter than median PR) if programmed in MVP mode compared with DDDR mode and it was lower (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.43-0.99; P = 0.049) in patients with long PR (equal to or longer than median PR) if programmed in DDDR mode compared with MVP.
CONCLUSION: Our data show that PR interval may be used as a selection criterion to identify the optimal physiological pacing mode. Persistent AF incidence was lower in short PR patients treated by right ventricular pacing minimization and in long PR patients treated by standard dual-chamber pacing.
METHODS AND RESULTS: In the MINERVA trial, 1166 patients were randomized to Control DDDR, MVP, or atrial anti-tachycardia pacing plus MVP (DDDRP + MVP). We evaluated the interaction of PR interval with pacing mode by comparing the risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) longer than 7 consecutive days as a function of PR interval. Out of 906 patients with available data, the median PR interval was 180 ms. The PR interval was found to significantly (P = 0.012) interact with pacing mode for AF incidence: the risk of AF > 7 days was lower [hazard ratio (HR) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.34-0.99; P = 0.047] in patients with short PR (shorter than median PR) if programmed in MVP mode compared with DDDR mode and it was lower (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.43-0.99; P = 0.049) in patients with long PR (equal to or longer than median PR) if programmed in DDDR mode compared with MVP.
CONCLUSION: Our data show that PR interval may be used as a selection criterion to identify the optimal physiological pacing mode. Persistent AF incidence was lower in short PR patients treated by right ventricular pacing minimization and in long PR patients treated by standard dual-chamber pacing.