Key result
Optimized AV delay in patients with first degree AV block and PQ > 220 ms may be better than preserving own contraction with pathologic AV delay to prevent asynchrony and remodeling.
Why the study?
Does optimized AV delay improve outcomes compared to preserving own contraction in patients with dual chamber pacemakers and first degree AV block?
Does optimized AV delay improve outcomes compared to preserving own contraction in patients with dual chamber pacemakers and first degree AV block?
Optimized AV delay with septal pacing may prevent asynchrony and remodeling compared to preserving intrinsic conduction in patients with first-degree AV block and PQ > 220 ms.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May warrant consideration in select dual-chamber pacemaker patients; leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
<ns3:p>Septal pacing in patients with dual chamber pacemakers and atrio-ventricular (AV) conduction malfunction, but without structural heart muscle impairment, is not worse than own AV conduction. Optimized AV delay in patients with first degree AV block and PQ interval 220 ms may be better than preserving own contraction with pathologic atrio-ventricular delay, leading to asynchrony, ventricle remodeling and relaxation disorders.</ns3:p>
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wojdyła‐Hordyńska et al. (2017) studied First degree atrioventricular block in patients with dual chamber pacemakers. Optimized atrioventricular delay (septal pacing) vs. Preserving own contraction with pathologic atrioventricular delay was evaluated. Optimized AV delay in patients with first degree AV block and PQ > 220 ms may be better than preserving own contraction with pathologic AV delay to prevent asynchrony and remodeling.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: