Key result
Anti-atrial fibrillation pacemaker algorithms did not significantly change overall AF burden (P=ns), though the rate-soothing algorithm reduced PAC-initiated PAF from 25% to 17% (P<0.05).
Why the study?
Do anti-atrial fibrillation pacemaker algorithms reduce AF burden or improve symptoms in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation?
Population
79 randomized patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation who had at least three symptomatic episodes…
Comparison
Third generation anti-atrial fibrillation… vs 'All off' dual chamber universal mode pacing.
Design
RCT, Randomized to four, month-long phases in a crossover design.
Follow-up
4 months (four month-long phases)
Authors
Loading...
Anti-AF pacemaker algorithms do not reduce overall AF burden; challenges routine use and leaves open targeted algorithm effects.
RCT (n=182)
Crossover
Yes
Do anti-atrial fibrillation pacemaker algorithms reduce AF burden or improve symptoms in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation?
p-value: p=ns
The use of specific anti-atrial fibrillation pacemaker algorithms did not significantly reduce overall AF burden or improve symptoms compared to standard DDD pacing in patients with paroxysmal AF.
Sulke et al. (2007) conducted an RCT in Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (n=182). Anti-atrial fibrillation pacemaker algorithms (rate soothing, ventricular rate stabilization, or both) vs. 'All off' dual chamber universal mode (DDD 60) was evaluated on AF burden, AF episode number, quality of life, and symptoms (p=ns). Anti-atrial fibrillation pacemaker algorithms did not significantly change overall AF burden (P=ns), though the rate-soothing algorithm reduced PAC-initiated PAF from 25% to 17% (P<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: