Key result
Automatic AVI optimization via peak endocardial acceleration performs comparably to manual Doppler echocardiography.
Why the study?
The contribution of the plateau phase of peak endocardial acceleration as an indicator of optimal ventricular filling and appropriate atrioventricular interval at rest and during exercise was studied.
Does automatic optimization of atrioventricular interval using a peak endocardial acceleration sensor provide comparable optimal AVI and cardiac output to Doppler echocardiography in patients with complete AV block?
Population
12 patients with complete AV block and PEA sensing DDDR pacemakers
Comparison
AVI automatically optimized by PEA sensor vs AVI manually optimized by Doppler echocardiography
Design
Observational study
Authors
Loading...
Supports feasibility of automatic AV optimization; leaves open whether it improves outcomes versus echocardiography in CRT.
Observational (n=12)
Does automatic optimization of atrioventricular interval using a peak endocardial acceleration sensor provide comparable optimal AVI and cardiac output to Doppler echocardiography in patients with complete AV block?
Absolute Event Rate: 142% vs 146%
p-value: p=0.59
Automatic optimization of the atrioventricular interval using a peak endocardial acceleration sensor is comparable to manual optimization by Doppler echocardiography in patients with complete AV block.
LEUNG et al. (2000) conducted an observational in Complete AV block (n=12). Automatic optimization of atrioventricular interval using peak endocardial acceleration (PEA) vs. Manual optimization by Doppler echocardiography was evaluated on Mean atrioventricular interval (AVI) at rest (p=0.59). Automatic optimization of the atrioventricular interval using peak endocardial acceleration was comparable to manual optimization by Doppler echocardiography (142 vs 146 ms, P=0.59).