January 1, 2006Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Is a Dual‐Sensor Pacemaker Appropriate in Patients with Sino‐Atrial Disease? Results from the DUSISLOG Study
Key result
Dual-sensor rate-responsive pacing provided no additional benefit over single-sensor pacing in the overall population, though a subgroup with marked chronotropic incompetence showed improved QoL.
Why the study?
Does dual-sensor rate-responsive pacing improve physical activity and quality of life compared to single-sensor pacing in patients with sino-atrial disease?
Population
105 patients who received a rate-responsive pacemaker for sino-atrial disease
Comparison
Dual-sensor rate-responsive pacing optimized… vs Single-sensor rate-responsive pacing for 3 months
Design
RCT, Randomized to single sensor (accelerometer or minute ventilation)
Follow-up
7 months
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Dual-sensor pacing need not supplant single-sensor devices routinely; confirms limited overall benefit with targeted value only in marked chronotropic incompetence.
Study Design
Type
RCT (n=105)
Randomization
randomized
Multicenter
Yes
Structured PICO
Does dual-sensor rate-responsive pacing improve physical activity and quality of life compared to single-sensor pacing in patients with sino-atrial disease?
P
Population
105 patients who received a rate-responsive pacemaker, evaluated over 3 months of single-sensor and 3 months of dual-sensor pacing.
I
Intervention
Dual-sensor rate-responsive pacing (accelerometer and minute ventilation) optimized with automatic response for 3 months
C
Comparator
Single-sensor rate-responsive pacing (accelerometer or minute ventilation, randomized) for 3 months
O
Outcome
Mean percentage of physical activity, mean intensity of activity, Quality of life (QoL) scores, and 6-minute walk test (WT)surrogate
Dual-sensor pacemakers do not provide additional benefit over single-sensor devices for most patients, except in a selected population with advanced atrial chronotropic disease.
Cite This Study
Padeletti et al. (2006) conducted an RCT in Sino-Atrial Disease (n=105). Dual-sensor rate-responsive pacing vs. Single-sensor rate-responsive pacing was evaluated on Mean percentage of physical activity, mean intensity of activity, Quality of life (QoL) scores, and 6-minute walk test. Dual-sensor rate-responsive pacing provided no additional benefit over single-sensor pacing in the overall population, though a subgroup with marked chronotropic incompetence showed improved QoL.