Key result
Temperature-based rate-responsive pacing in a leadless pacemaker was proportional to metabolic workload, with mean slopes of 0.93 and 0.91.
Why the study?
A new dual-chamber leadless pacemaker system uses a temperature-based rate-response sensor, creating a need to evaluate whether rate response is proportional to metabolic workload during exercise in ventricular and atrial devices.
Does temperature-based rate-responsive pacing provide a proportional rate response to metabolic workload during exercise in patients with leadless pacemakers?
Does temperature-based rate-responsive pacing provide a proportional rate response to metabolic workload during exercise in patients with leadless pacemakers?
The temperature-based rate-response sensor in leadless pacemakers effectively modulates pacing rate proportionally to metabolic demand during exercise.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Temperature sensor appears effective for rate response in DR-LP during exercise; leaves open need for randomized outcome trials before practice change.
BACKGROUND: A new dual-chamber leadless pacemaker (DR-LP) system, composed of 2 implantable devices in the right ventricle and right atrium, uses a less common temperature-based rate-response sensor. There is a need to understand the effectiveness of the rate response during exercise in both the ventricular (VR-LP) and atrial (AR-LP) devices. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether temperature-based rate-responsive pacing is proportional to metabolic workload during an exercise test in a leadless pacemaker system. METHODS: After 6 weeks of implantation, we administered a treadmill exercise protocol to eligible participants concurrently enrolled in the LEADLESS II-Phase 2 and Aveir DR i2i studies. Programmed settings were optimized after a prior 6-minute walk test. We evaluated the ventricular and atrial rate-response sensors in participants implanted with the VR-LP and DR-LP system, respectively. For each device, the normalized slopes of sensor-indicated rate vs metabolic workload were aggregated across all analyzable patients. If the mean slope's 95% confidence interval (CI) fell within the prespecified 0.65 and 1.35 acceptance range, the rate response was considered proportional to metabolic demand. RESULTS: Seventeen participants had a mean ventricular rate-response slope of 0.93 ± 0.29 (CI, 0.78-1.08), which fell within the acceptance criteria (P = .001). Twenty participants had a mean atrial rate-response slope of 0.91 ± 0.28 (CI, 0.78-1.05), also falling within the prespecified criteria (P < .001). CONCLUSION: The temperature-based sensor in a dual-chamber leadless pacemaker system was shown to be effective at modulating pacing rate in response to increased metabolic demand for right ventricular and atrial devices. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04559945 (LEADLESS II-Phase 2 study) and NCT05252702 (Aveir DR i2i study).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rashtian et al. (2024) studied Patients with a dual-chamber leadless pacemaker system (n=20). Temperature-based rate-responsive pacing vs. Prespecified acceptance range of 0.65 to 1.35 was evaluated on Normalized slopes of sensor-indicated rate vs metabolic workload (Mean slope 0.93 (ventricular) and 0.91 (atrial), 95% CI 0.78-1.08 (ventricular), 0.78-1.05 (atrial), p=.001 (ventricular), <.001 (atrial)). Temperature-based rate-responsive pacing in a leadless pacemaker was proportional to metabolic workload, with mean slopes of 0.93 and 0.91.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: