Heart failure & cardiomyopathies
Effect of rate-adaptive atrial support compared to VDD pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy recipients: A randomized cross-over study
Authors' conclusion
In this cohort, rate-adaptive atrial support did not offer any advantage over VDD pacing in terms of functional capacity or echocardiographic response.
Study context
- Population
- Sinus rhythm patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT)-defibrillator implantation
- Participants
- 26 patients
- Comparison
- DDDR vs VDD pacing
- Primary endpoint
- 6MWT distance
- Follow-up
- After each 6-month period
Methodological detailsmulticentre, double-blind
- Multicentre
- Double-blind
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
P = 0.71
- Sequence of pacing modes not significant
- P = 0.17
- Study period positively correlated with follow-up distance
- P = 0.03
- Baseline distance positively correlated with follow-up distance
- P < 0.01
Further findings
- Atrial pacing percentage with DDDR
- 55% · median · IQR 48%–71%
CRT responders
- Proportion of CRT responders at 6 months
- 73%
- Proportion of CRT responders at 12 months
- 79%
Echocardiographic parameters (incl. LVEF, ventricular volumes)
- No significant differences between pacing modes
Original publication
Effect of rate-adaptive atrial support compared to VDD pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy recipients: A randomized cross-over study. Am Heart J. Published 17 December 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →