Key result
Chronic coronary sinus pacing is safe and feasible, with no significant difference in energy parameters between proximal (2.18 mJ) and distal (1.27 mJ) sites at 2 years (P>0.05).
Why the study?
Does permanent left atrial pacing via the coronary sinus provide stable long-term pacing parameters in patients with paroxysmal AF refractory to drug therapy?
Observational (n=24)
Does permanent left atrial pacing via the coronary sinus provide stable long-term pacing parameters in patients with paroxysmal AF refractory to drug therapy?
Absolute Event Rate: 2.18% vs 1.27%
p-value: p=>0.05
Chronic coronary sinus pacing is a safe and feasible technique with stable long-term energy parameters that do not significantly differ between proximal and distal sites.
May support coronary sinus pacing in select AF cases; leaves open need for prospective trials before broader adoption.
Left atrial pacing is feasible via the coronary sinus. However, long-term characteristics of coronary sinus pacing parameters are largely undefined as yet. This study assessed the feasibility and long-term pacing parameters of coronary sinus pacing. Twenty four patients (13 men, 11 women) with a history of paroxysmal AF refractory to drug therapy underwent biatrial pacemaker implantation. Leads were sited in the high right atrium or right atrial appendage and in either proximal (PCS) or distal coronary sinus (DCS). Pacemaker parameters were measured at implant, 24 hours postimplant, 1 month, 3 months, and at 3 monthly intervals over a period of 2 years. Threshold, impedance, and energy requirements (E = Threshold2/impedance x pulse width) were measured. There was one lead displacement from the PCS within 24 hours postimplant. There were no other acute or chronic complications. The energy values at implant and at 2 years were 0.49 +/- 0.47 and 2.18 +/- 1.69 mJ for the PCS leads and 0.94 +/- 1.47 and 1.27 +/- 0.75 mJ for the DCS leads. P values were >0.05 at all points and suggested no significant difference between the two sites over the long-term. Chronic coronary sinus pacing is a safe and feasible technique. There was no significant difference in energy parameters for leads positioned in the proximal or distal coronary sites. The trends seen at both sites for chronic changes in pacing characteristics are analogous to those described for endocardial leads at other sites.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mirza et al. (2004) conducted an observational in Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation refractory to drug therapy (n=24). Coronary sinus pacing vs. Proximal vs distal coronary sinus sites was evaluated on Energy values at 2 years (p=>0.05). Chronic coronary sinus pacing is safe and feasible, with no significant difference in energy parameters between proximal (2.18 mJ) and distal (1.27 mJ) sites at 2 years (P>0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: