Long-term prognosis in symptomatic sinus node disease after ventricular pacing is largely driven by the presence and progression of underlying structural heart disease rather than the arrhythmia itself.
Prognosis after ventricular pacing for sinus node disease depends primarily on underlying heart disease; leaves open whether pacing modifies outcomes independent of structural disease.
Fifty-nine patients between the ages of 13 and 88 with sinus node disease, who received a permanent ventricular pacemaker between 1965 and 1976 at one institution, were followed to determine the natural history of the disorder after permanent pacing. Nineteen had ischemic heart disease, six had primary myocardial disease, and eight valvular heart disease. In 26, no etiology for the arrhythmia was apparent. The one- and five-year survival was 85.5% and 73.1%, respectively. Patients with underlying heart disease had a significantly poorer survival when compared to those without (58% versus 94% at 36 months) and all but 3 of 13 deaths in the first 36 months were in those with ischemic heart disease. There was a distinct trend toward poor survival in those with heart failure prior to pacemaker implant and those over age 65. Patients with sinus bradycardia alone did best (91% survival three years after implant), while those with bradycardia-tachycardia syndrome and those with sinoatrial arrest alone did distinctly worse (76% and 65% survival at three years, respectively). Twelve of 18 deaths were due to progression of underlying heart disease. The long-term prognosis with symptomatic sinus node disease can be predicted in part by (1) etiology of the underlying heart disease, (2) pre-implant arrhythmia, and (3) ventricular function prior to implant.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Simón et al. (1979) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: