Key result
Personalized pacemaker reprogramming improves LVEF by ~3% vs usual care in bradycardia patients.
Why the study?
Right ventricular pacing is associated with heightened risk of left ventricular systolic dysfunction and heart failure, prompting evaluation of personalised reprogramming to avoid it.
Does personalised pacemaker reprogramming to avoid right ventricular pacing improve left ventricular ejection fraction in patients with pacemakers implanted for ≥2 years?
RCT (n=100)
Double-blind
1:1 parallel group
Yes
Does personalised pacemaker reprogramming to avoid right ventricular pacing improve left ventricular ejection fraction in patients with pacemakers implanted for ≥2 years?
Personalised pacemaker reprogramming to minimize right ventricular pacing significantly improves left ventricular ejection fraction and preserves battery life in patients with long-term pacemakers.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports reprogramming to minimize RV pacing in chronic pacemaker recipients; extends evidence for LV preservation to long-term implants.
BACKGROUND: Pacemakers are widely utilised to treat bradycardia, but right ventricular (RV) pacing is associated with heightened risk of left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction and heart failure. We aimed to compare personalised pacemaker reprogramming to avoid RV pacing with usual care on echocardiographic and patient-orientated outcomes. METHODS: A prospective phase II randomised, double-blind, parallel-group trial in 100 patients with a pacemaker implanted for indications other than third degree heart block for ≥2 years. Personalised pacemaker reprogramming was guided by a published protocol. Primary outcome was change in LV ejection fraction on echocardiography after 6 months. Secondary outcomes included LV remodeling, quality of life, and battery longevity. RESULTS: Clinical and pacemaker variables were similar between groups. The mean age (SD) of participants was 76 (+/-9) years and 71% were male. Nine patients withdrew due to concurrent illness, leaving 91 patients in the intention-to-treat analysis. At 6 months, personalised programming compared to usual care, reduced RV pacing (-6.5±1.8% versus -0.21±1.7%; p<0.01), improved LV function (LV ejection fraction +3.09% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48 to 5.70%; p = 0.02]) and LV dimensions (LV end systolic volume indexed to body surface area -2.99mL/m2 [95% CI -5.69 to -0.29; p = 0.03]). Intervention also preserved battery longevity by approximately 5 months (+0.38 years [95% CI 0.14 to 0.62; p<0.01)) with no evidence of an effect on quality of life (+0.19, [95% CI -0.25 to 0.62; p = 0.402]). CONCLUSIONS: Personalised programming in patients with pacemakers for bradycardia can improve LV function and size, extend battery longevity, and is safe and acceptable to patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03627585.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paton et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in Pacemaker-related left ventricular dysfunction (n=100). Personalised pacemaker reprogramming vs. Usual care was evaluated on Change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at 6 months (Mean difference 3.09%, 95% CI 0.48 to 5.70, p=0.02).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: