Key result
High-frequency endocardial vagal atrioventricular node stimulation maintained ventricular rate control during AF at 18 months, with pacing outputs comparable to implantation (P>0.100).
Why the study?
Does high-frequency stimulation of efferent AV node vagal fibres maintain its dromotropic effect on ventricular rate control during AF at 18-month follow-up in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF?
Observational (n=12)
Does high-frequency stimulation of efferent AV node vagal fibres maintain its dromotropic effect on ventricular rate control during AF at 18-month follow-up in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF?
p-value: p=> 0.100
Endocardial vagal AV node stimulation maintains its dromotropic effect for ventricular rate control during AF at 18 months post-implantation, with stable pacing parameters.
May support durable vagal AV nodal stimulation for AF rate control; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
AIMS: Control of atrioventricular (AV) node conduction by means of high-frequency stimulation (HFS) of efferent AV node vagal stimulation (AVNS) fibres enables the ventricular rate (VR) to be modulated during atrial fibrillation (AF). The aims of this study were to verify, on 18-month follow-up, the reproducibility of the dromotropic effect obtained on implantation and the long-term reliability of the system in patients who received an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) with a standard atrial lead positioned at a location suitable for AVNS. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 12 patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF who were candidates for ICD. The right atrium was mapped to locate the pacing site, and a transvenous screw-in lead was implanted in that region. The voltages required for VR modulation (25% VR reduction) and complete AV block at different pulse durations (from 0.1 to 0.5 ms) were recorded. Eleven out of 12 patients underwent 18-month follow-up examination. Atrial pacing parameters were adequate and did not differ from the baseline values (all P > 0.05): pacing threshold 0.9 ± 0.5 V (0.5 ms pulse duration) and impedance 556 ± 121 Ω, with P-wave amplitude of 1.6 ± 0.7 mV. High-frequency stimulation induced VR modulation in nine patients and complete AV block in eight patients at pulse durations ≥0.3 ms. No differences were observed in the voltages for VR modulation and complete AV block between implantation and 18-month examination (all P > 0.100). CONCLUSION: Ventricular rate control during AF was obtained under HFS 18 months after implantation in patients with the atrial lead positioned at a location suitable for AVNS. The pacing outputs needed to achieve the dromotropic effect were comparable to those measured on implantation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rossi et al. (2010) conducted an observational in Paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (n=12). Endocardial vagal atrioventricular node stimulation (AVNS) via high-frequency stimulation vs. Baseline (implantation values) was evaluated on Voltages required for ventricular rate modulation and complete AV block at 18 months compared to implantation (p=> 0.100). High-frequency endocardial vagal atrioventricular node stimulation maintained ventricular rate control during AF at 18 months, with pacing outputs comparable to implantation (P>0.100).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: