Key result
Closed Loop Stimulation atrial pacing provides a more physiological stress response than accelerometer pacing in CHD.
Why the study?
No data are available on the effects of Closed Loop Stimulation physiological pacing in young patients with complex congenital heart defects and sinus node dysfunction.
Does Closed Loop Stimulation (CLS) atrial pacing improve physiological heart rate response to stress compared to accelerometer-driven pacing in young patients with complex congenital heart defects and sinus node dysfunction?
Comparison
Closed Loop Stimulation atrial pacing vs rate-responsive accelerometer-driven pacing
Design
Case series with telemetric and Holter monitoring assessments
Follow-up
1-2 months
Authors
Loading...
CLS atrial pacing yielded physiological HR response in 9 young CHD patients; hypothesis-generating for SND management, larger trials needed before practice change.
Case Report (n=9)
Does Closed Loop Stimulation (CLS) atrial pacing improve physiological heart rate response to stress compared to accelerometer-driven pacing in young patients with complex congenital heart defects and sinus node dysfunction?
CLS-atrial pacing provides a more physiological heart rate response to physical and emotional stress compared to standard accelerometer-driven pacing in young patients with complex congenital heart defects.
Silvetti et al. (2018) conducted a case report in Complex congenital heart defects (CHD) and sinus node dysfunction (SND) (n=9). Closed Loop Stimulation (CLS) atrial pacing vs. Rate-responsive accelerometer-driven pacing (AAIR) was evaluated on Heart rate response to neurovegetative stresses and exercise stress test. In 9 young patients with complex congenital heart defects, Closed Loop Stimulation atrial pacing demonstrated a more physiological heart rate response to stress than accelerometer-driven pacing.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: