Key result
Atrioventricular pacing boosts cardiac output ~18% over ventricular demand pacing in severe symptomatic bradycardia.
Why the study?
The hemodynamic effects of maintaining atrioventricular synchrony during emergency cardiac pacing in critically ill patients were not well defined.
Does atrioventricular pacing improve hemodynamic parameters compared to ventricular demand pacing in critically ill patients with severe symptomatic bradycardia?
RCT (n=40)
Double-blind
Randomized
No
Does atrioventricular pacing improve hemodynamic parameters compared to ventricular demand pacing in critically ill patients with severe symptomatic bradycardia?
Maintaining atrioventricular synchrony during emergency cardiac pacing in critically ill patients significantly improves cardiac output and mean arterial pressure compared to ventricular demand pacing.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Prioritize atrioventricular over ventricular demand pacing to optimize cardiac output in critically ill bradycardic patients; confirms hemodynamic superiority of AV synchrony in this population.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Donovan et al. (1991) conducted an RCT in Severe symptomatic bradycardia (n=40). Atrioventricular pacing vs. Ventricular demand pacing was evaluated on Cardiac output (p=<.0001). Atrioventricular pacing significantly increased cardiac output from 4.5 to 5.3 L/min (p<.0001) compared to ventricular demand pacing in critically ill patients with severe symptomatic bradycardia.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: