Conventional and dedicated atrial overdrive pacing for the prevention of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the AFTherapy study
Why the study?
Does conventional atrial overdrive pacing or dedicated preventive pacing algorithms reduce AF burden in patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal AF?
Population
372 patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF)
Comparison
Dual-chamber pacing device delivering… vs Single rate pacing at 40 min-1 and conventional…
Design
RCT, Randomized to single rate or rate-responsive pacing with lower rates of…
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Overview
Preventive pacing algorithms confer no AF burden reduction; confirms conventional pacing at 70 bpm suffices without added algorithms in drug-refractory paroxysmal AF.
Structured PICO
Does conventional atrial overdrive pacing or dedicated preventive pacing algorithms reduce AF burden in patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal AF?
P
Population
372 patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF)
I
Intervention
Dual-chamber pacing device delivering conventional overdrive pacing (single rate or rate-responsive pacing at lower rates of 70 or 85 min-1) and dedicated preventive pacing (lower rate of 70 min-1 with four preventive pacing algorithms)
C
Comparator
Single rate pacing at 40 min-1 (for conventional pacing phase) and conventional pacing at 70 min-1 without preventive algorithms (for preventive pacing phase)
O
Outcome
Atrial fibrillation (AF) burdensurrogate
Conventional atrial overdrive pacing and dedicated preventive pacing algorithms do not significantly reduce AF burden in patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal AF.
Limitations
- A substantial amount of data was excluded from the analysis because of atrial-sensing artefacts identified in the device-captured diagnostics
Cite This Study
Camm et al. (2007) studied this question.