Why the study?
Does single-site RV pacing better preserve haemodynamic function and electrical activation compared to biventricular pacing in an acute swine model with normal anatomy and function?
Population
Acute swine model with normal anatomy and function (n=7)
Comparison
Endocardial single-site pacing from the right… vs Biventricular pacing and intrinsic activation
Design
Preclinical
Follow-up
5 minutes of consistent capture
Key result
Acute biventricular pacing in intact, synchronous swine hearts resulted in systolic dysfunction (P<0.05) and abnormal left ventricular electrical activation compared to intrinsic activation.
Authors
Loading...
Raises caution for biventricular pacing in normal hearts; leaves open translation to human conduction disease.
Does single-site RV pacing better preserve haemodynamic function and electrical activation compared to biventricular pacing in an acute swine model with normal anatomy and function?
p-value: p=<0.05
In an acute swine model with structurally normal hearts, biventricular pacing impairs systolic function and electrical activation, whereas right ventricular septal pacing better preserves intrinsic function.
Kimmel et al. (2007) studied Structurally normal hearts (n=7). Biventricular pacing and single-site right ventricular pacing vs. Intrinsic activation was evaluated on Haemodynamic function and electrical activation sequences (p=<0.05). Acute biventricular pacing in intact, synchronous swine hearts resulted in systolic dysfunction (P<0.05) and abnormal left ventricular electrical activation compared to intrinsic activation.