Key result
DDDR pacing acutely improves 6MWT distance by ~18m vs DDD pacing in severe chronotropic incompetence.
Why the study?
Whether rate responsive pacing with CRT acutely improves exercise performance in patients with advanced CHF and severe chronotropic incompetence was unknown.
Does DDDR (rate responsive) pacing improve exercise performance in patients with advanced chronic heart failure, a CRT device, and severe chronotropic incompetence compared to DDD pacing?
Population
13 patients with advanced CHF, CRT device, and severe chronotropic incompetence
Comparison
DDDR (rate responsive) pacing vs DDD (control) pacing
Design
Double-blind randomized crossover pilot study
Follow-up
1 week per crossover period
Authors
Loading...
Supports DDDR pacing for acute exercise gains in advanced HF with chronotropic incompetence; extends randomized evidence in CRT recipients.
RCT (n=13)
Double-blind
Crossover
Does DDDR (rate responsive) pacing improve exercise performance in patients with advanced chronic heart failure, a CRT device, and severe chronotropic incompetence compared to DDD pacing?
Absolute Event Rate: 376.8% vs 358.5%
p-value: p=< 0.05
Rate responsive pacing (DDDR) using a CRT device acutely improves submaximal exercise performance (6MWT distance) in patients with advanced heart failure and severe chronotropic incompetence.
Sims et al. (2011) conducted an RCT in Advanced chronic heart failure and severe chronotropic incompetence (n=13). DDDR (rate responsive) pacing vs. DDD (control) pacing was evaluated on Six minutes walk test (6MWT) distance (p=< 0.05). Rate responsive (DDDR) pacing acutely improved 6-minute walk distance compared to DDD pacing in patients with advanced heart failure and severe chronotropic incompetence (376.8 vs 358.5 m; P<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: