Association between ventricular pacing and persistent atrial fibrillation in patients indicated to elective pacemaker replacement: Results of the Prefer for Elective Replacement MVP (PreFER MVP) randomized study.

BACKGROUND

Pacing in the right ventricle can cause a variety of detrimental effects, including atrial tachyarrhythmias (atrial tachycardia [AT]/atrial fibrillation [AF]).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence and predictors of persistent AT/AF in patients with long-term exposure to ventricular pacing.

METHODS

In a multicenter international trial, 605 patients (age 75 ± 11 years, 240 women) referred for replacement of an implanted pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), with a history of high-percentage (>40%) ventricular pacing, were randomly allocated to standard dual-chamber pacing or managed ventricular pacing (MVP), a pacing modality that minimizes ventricular pacing. The main end-point of this secondary analysis of the PreFER MVP randomized study was persistent AT/AF, defined as ≥7 consecutive days with AT/AF or AT/AF interrupted by atrial cardioversion or AT/AF present during 2 consecutive follow-up visits.

RESULTS

Persistent AT/AF was observed in 71 patients (11.7%) after 2 years of follow-up. At multivariable Cox regression analysis, prior AT/AF (hazard ratio [HR] 2.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-6.22, P = .017) and ventricular pacing percentage, estimated in the first 3 months, ≥10% (HR 3.24, 95% 95% CI 1.13-9.31, P = .029) were independent predictors for persistent AT/AF. MVP was associated with persistent AT/AF risk (HR 3.41, 95% 95% CI 1.10-10.6, P = .024) in the subgroup of patients with baseline long PR interval (PR >230 ms) but not in the whole population.

CONCLUSION

In pacemaker and ICD replacement patients, a high percentage of ventricular pacing is associated with higher risk of persistent AT/AF. Use of algorithms that minimize right ventricular pacing may benefit patients with normal spontaneous AV conduction but should be evaluated with caution in patients with long PR interval.