Does right ventricular outflow tract pacing improve long-term survival compared to right ventricular apical pacing in patients with preserved left ventricular function requiring permanent cardiac pacing?
Right ventricular outflow tract pacing does not provide a long-term survival benefit over traditional right ventricular apical pacing in patients with preserved left ventricular function.
BACKGROUND: Optimal right ventricular (RV) pacing site in patients referred for permanent cardiac pacing remains controversial. A prospective randomized trial was done to compare long-term effect of permanent RV apex (RVA) vs RV outflow tract (RVOT) pacing on the all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 122 consecutive patients (70 men, 69 +/-11 years), with standard pacing indications were randomized to RVA (66 patients) or RVOT (56 patients) ventricular lead placement. After the 10-year follow-up period the mortality data were summarized on the basis of an intention-to-treat analysis. During the long-term follow-up, 31 patients from the RVA group died vs 24 patients in the RVOT group (hazard ratio (HR), 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.57-1.65; P=0.89). There were 10 cardiovascular deaths in the RVA and 12 in the RVOT group (HR, 1.04; 95%CI, 0.45-2.41; P=0.93). There were no differences in the all-cause or cardiovascular mortality between the pacing sites after adjustment for age, gender, arterial hypertension, atrial fibrillation, New York Heart Association class and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter. CONCLUSIONS: The RVOT provides no additional benefit in terms of long-term survival over RVA pacing.
Dąbrowska-Kugacka et al. (2009) studied this question.