Key result
Physiological pacemaker implantation reduced the occurrence of atrial fibrillation from 24.4% to 12.2% (P<0.05), but did not prevent the recurrence of atrial flutter.
Why the study?
Does physiological pacemaker implantation reduce the incidence of atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation in patients requiring pacemakers for AV block or sick sinus syndrome?
Observational (n=123)
Does physiological pacemaker implantation reduce the incidence of atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation in patients requiring pacemakers for AV block or sick sinus syndrome?
Absolute Event Rate: 12.2% vs 24.4%
p-value: p=<0.05
Physiological pacing reduces the occurrence of atrial fibrillation but does not prevent the recurrence of atrial flutter, suggesting that radiofrequency catheter ablation should be considered for patients with pre-existing atrial flutter.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Physiological pacing was associated with lower atrial fibrillation; leaves open effects on flutter recurrence and ablation need.
Ishikawa et al. (2000) conducted an observational in Atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation in patients requiring pacemakers (n=123). Physiological pacemaker implantation vs. Pre-implantation baseline was evaluated on Occurrence of atrial fibrillation (p=<0.05). Physiological pacemaker implantation reduced the occurrence of atrial fibrillation from 24.4% to 12.2% (P<0.05), but did not prevent the recurrence of atrial flutter.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: