Key result
Sorin DDD pacemakers spontaneously revert to VOO backup mode in 40% of patients.
Observational (n=10)
No
The prevalence of mode reversion to backup mode (VOO) in Sorin DDD pacemakers may be higher than the manufacturer's 1% estimate and can occur without apparent electromagnetic interference.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May warrant heightened vigilance for Sorin pacemakers; leaves open whether spontaneous reversion exceeds manufacturer estimates.
Sorin recently identified mode reversion to backup mode (VOO). They estimate a prevalence of 1% and suggest electromagnetic interference (EMI) as the cause. We identified ten patients being followed in our pacing clinic, of whom four were found to have suffered mode reversion. We, therefore, conclude that the prevalence of this problem may be greater than predicted. None of the patients who were found to have mode reversion gave any history to suggest that they had been exposed to EMI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Turner et al. (1998) conducted an observational in Patients with a Sorin DDD pacemaker model (n=10). Sorin DDD pacemaker model was evaluated on Mode reversion to backup mode (VOO). Among 10 patients with a Sorin DDD pacemaker, 4 (40%) experienced mode reversion to backup mode (VOO) without any history of exposure to electromagnetic interference.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: