Why the study?
Does physiological pacing reduce stroke or cardiovascular death compared to ventricular pacing in patients requiring a pacemaker for symptomatic bradycardia?
Population
2,568 patients requiring a pacemaker for symptomatic bradycardia
Comparison
Physiological pacemakers vs Ventricular pacemakers
Design
RCT, Randomized
Follow-up
mean 6.4 years
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Physiological pacing does not reduce cardiovascular death or stroke; confirms primary endpoint neutrality while extending atrial fibrillation benefit to 6.4 years.
Structured PICO
Does physiological pacing reduce stroke or cardiovascular death compared to ventricular pacing in patients requiring a pacemaker for symptomatic bradycardia?
P
Population
2,568 patients requiring a pacemaker for symptomatic bradycardia
I
Intervention
Physiological pacemakers
C
Comparator
Ventricular pacemakers
O
Outcome
Composite of stroke or cardiovascular deathcomposite
Extended follow-up to 6.4 years confirms that physiological pacing does not reduce cardiovascular death or stroke compared to ventricular pacing, but provides a persistent and significant reduction in the development of atrial fibrillation.
Cite This Study
Kerr et al. (2004) studied this question.