Why the study?
Does programming of different AV delays affect stroke volume at rest in patients with complete AV block and dual chamber pacing?
Does programming of different AV delays affect stroke volume at rest in patients with complete AV block and dual chamber pacing?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
While dual chamber pacing improves resting stroke volume compared to ventricular pacing alone in patients with complete AV block, modifying the AV delay does not further impact resting systolic performance.
Dual chamber pacing (DDD) maintains atrioventricular (AV) sequence; AV delay programmability modifies the relationship between atrial and ventricular contraction. To evaluate the hemodynamic effects of such a modification, ten patients with a DDD unit for complete AV block were studied by time-motion (M-mode) and Doppler echocardiography during inhibited ventricular pacing (VVI), atrial-triggered ventricular pacing (VDD) and atrioventricular sequential pacing (DVI) at different AV delay (90, 140, 190, 240 msec). A significant improvement in stroke volume (SV) (15%-20%, P less than 0.05) was seen during DDD versus VVI pacing; no changes, however, were observed in the same patient with different AV delay or during DVI versus VDD pacing. These data suggest that programming of AV delay does not affect systolic performance at rest; longer diastolic filling times recorded during DDD pacing with "short" AV delay (90-140 msec) do not seem to be a hemodynamically relevant epi-phenomenon of PM programming.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Occhetta et al. (1990) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: