Key result
Sequicor DDD pacing is linked to hemodynamic benefits over DVI or VVI in ~70% of patients.
Why the study?
Initial experience with the Sequicor DDD pacemaker was needed to evaluate its function, battery performance, complications, and hemodynamic benefits compared to DVI or VVI pacing.
Does the Sequicor DDD pacemaker provide hemodynamic benefits and acceptable safety compared to DVI or VVI pacing in patients with A-V block or sick sinus syndrome?
Observational (n=35)
Does the Sequicor DDD pacemaker provide hemodynamic benefits and acceptable safety compared to DVI or VVI pacing in patients with A-V block or sick sinus syndrome?
Initial experience with the Sequicor DDD pacemaker showed improved hemodynamics in the majority of patients compared to older pacing modes, despite high battery drain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Should not change pacing practices; leaves open hemodynamic advantages of early DDD devices in select patients.
Duncan et al. (1983) conducted an observational in A-V block or sick sinus syndrome (n=35). Sequicor DDD pacemaker vs. DVI or VVI pacing was evaluated on Increase in hemodynamic benefits. The Sequicor DDD pacemaker demonstrated excellent electronic function and increased hemodynamic benefits compared to DVI or VVI pacing in 70% of patients, despite high battery drain.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: