Prolonged PR interval and incidence of atrial fibrillation, heart failure admissions, and mortality in patients with implanted cardiac devices: A real-world survey
Why the study?
PR interval prolongation has long been considered benign, particularly in nonstructural heart disease, leaving its effect on cardiovascular outcomes unclear in device-treated patients.
Does a prolonged PR interval increase the incidence of atrial fibrillation, heart failure hospitalization, or death in patients with implanted cardiac devices?
Population
25,752 patients with implanted dual-chamber permanent pacemakers or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators
Comparison
Longer vs shorter PR intervals
Design
Retrospective real-world cohort study
Follow-up
2.59 ± 2.18 years
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
May flag higher-risk device patients for monitoring; leaves open causal role and need for prospective trials.
Structured PICO
Does a prolonged PR interval increase the incidence of atrial fibrillation, heart failure hospitalization, or death in patients with implanted cardiac devices?
P
Population
25,752 patients with implanted dual-chamber permanent pacemakers or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, mean age 69.3 ± 13.9 years, 58% male.
I
Intervention
Prolonged PR interval (≥190 ms or ≥270 ms) measured during remote transmissions
C
Comparator
Shorter PR intervals (<190 ms)
O
Outcome
Time to the first occurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF), heart failure hospitalization (HFH), or deathcomposite
In patients with implanted cardiac devices, a prolonged PR interval (≥190 ms) is significantly associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation, heart failure hospitalization, and death.
Cite This Study
Yarmohammadi et al. (2022) studied this question.