Key result
Theophylline resolves recurrent sinus pauses within ~24 hours in infected, nonsurgical patients.
Why the study?
When permanent pacemaker placement is contraindicated due to active infection, alternative strategies such as pharmacologic agents may be needed for sinus pauses.
Does theophylline resolve sinus pauses in critically ill patients with contraindications to device-based pacing?
Case Report (n=2)
No
Does theophylline resolve sinus pauses in critically ill patients with contraindications to device-based pacing?
Theophylline may serve as an effective, non-invasive temporizing strategy for resolving sinus pauses in critically ill patients with active infections who are poor candidates for pacemaker implantation, though its use requires careful monitoring for proarrhythmic effects.
Theophylline may bridge infected patients with symptomatic sinus pauses; single-case data leaves open prospective validation before wider use.
Background: A sinus pause is is defined as a delay in sinus node depolarization exceeding 3 s following atrial depolarization. In patients with pauses greater than 5 s accompanied by hemodynamic compromise, the primary treatment is permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation. However, in the presence of an active infection, alternative strategies such as temporary transvenous pacing or pharmacologic agents may be more appropriate. This report highlights the use of theophylline as a non-invasive therapeutic option in two patients with asymptomatic sinus pauses who had contraindications to PPM placement. Cases: bacteremia, for which she was receiving chronic suppressive doxycycline. She was admitted for acute decompensated heart failure. Patient B was a 24-year-old man with a history of cerebral palsy and chronic respiratory failure who was admitted for bacterial pneumonia. While in the intensive care unit, both patients experienced recurrent, asymptomatic sinus pauses lasting up to 8.6 s. Discussion: Given their active infections, both patients were deemed poor candidates for device placement and were therefore initiated on theophylline. Within 24 h of initiation, the sinus pauses resolved in both patients. Theophylline doses were adjusted to maintain a therapeutic concentration between 10 and 20 µg/mL. Later during hospitalization, Patient A developed atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response, prompting discontinuation of theophylline. Patient B was discharged on theophylline 50 mg twice daily, along with a 30-day event monitor and cardiology follow-up. Theophylline exerts its positive chronotropic effects primarily through non-selective phosphodiesterase inhibition and adenosine-1 receptor antagonism. These mechanisms enhance automaticity and reduce atrioventricular node refractoriness, augmenting sinus node automaticity and reducing the frequency and duration of sinus pauses. Conclusion: While these cases highlight the potential role of theophylline as a temporizing pacing strategy, additional research is needed to determine whether and how theophylline can be safely incorporated into treatment protocols for patients who are not suitable for device-based pacing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Elahi et al. (2026) conducted a case report in Sinus pauses (n=2). Theophylline was evaluated on Resolution of sinus pauses.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: