Key result
Physiological cardiac pacing links to a ~43% sustained increase in maximum effort tolerance versus baseline.
Why the study?
The impact of physiological cardiac pacing on sustained exercise tolerance improvement was not well established.
Does physiological cardiac pacing improve effort tolerance compared to pre-pacing or ventricular inhibited pacing in patients with AV block and/or sick sinus syndrome?
Comparison
Physiological pacing vs pre-pacing baseline and ventricular inhibited pacing
Design
Observational cohort study
Follow-up
Mean 33 months
Authors
Loading...
May support physiological pacing in select patients; hypothesis-generating and requires RCTs before practice change.
Observational (n=53)
Does physiological cardiac pacing improve effort tolerance compared to pre-pacing or ventricular inhibited pacing in patients with AV block and/or sick sinus syndrome?
Effect estimate: 43% increase
p-value: p=<0.01
Physiological (dual-chamber) cardiac pacing provides a significant and sustained improvement in exercise tolerance compared to pre-pacing and standard ventricular pacing.
Sutton et al. (1983) conducted an observational in Atrioventricular block and sick sinus syndrome (n=53). Physiological cardiac pacing vs. Pre-pacing values and ventricular inhibited pacing was evaluated on Maximum effort tolerance (43% increase, p=<0.01). Physiological cardiac pacing increased maximum effort tolerance by 43% compared to pre-pacing values (P<0.01), an improvement sustained over a mean of 33 months.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: