This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Kassotis, J. Articles by Reddy, C. V.R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kassotis, J. Articles by Reddy, C. V.R. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Feasibility of Dual-Chamber (DDD) Pacing via a Single-Pass (VDD) Pacing Lead Employing a Floating Atrial Ring (Dipole): Case Series, Future Considerations, and Refinements

Clinical Electrophysiologic Services, Division Of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, New York Methodist Hospital, Clinical Affiliate of New York Presbyterian Hospital System, Brooklyn, NY, JTK747{at}aol.com

Louis Voigt, MD

Department of Medicine, New York Methodist Hospital, Clinical Affiliate of New York Presbyterian Hospital System, Brooklyn, NY

Mbu Mongwa, MD

Department of Medicine, New York Methodist Hospital, Clinical Affiliate of New York Presbyterian Hospital System, Brooklyn, NY

C. V.R. Reddy, MD

Division Of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, New York Methodist Hospital, Clinical Affiliate of New York Presbyterian Hospital System, Brooklyn, NY

The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of DDD pacing from a standard single-pass VDD pacemaker system. Over the past 2 decades significant advances have been made in the development of single-pass VDD pacing systems. These have been shown in long-term prospective studies to effectively preserve atrioventricular (AV) synchrony in patients with AV block and normal sinus node function. What remains problematic is the development of a single-pass pacing system capable of DDD pacing. Such a lead configuration would be useful in those patients with peripheral venous anomalies and in younger patients with congenital anomalies, which may require lead revisions in the future. In addition, with the increased use of resynchronization (biventricular pacing) therapy, the availability of a reliable single-pass lead will minimize operative time, enhance patient safety, and minimize the amount of hardware within the heart. The feasibility of DDD pacing via a Medtronic Capsure VDD-2 (Model #5038) pacing lead was evaluated. Twenty patients who presented with AV block and normal sinus node function were recruited for this study. Atrial pacing thresholds and sensitivities were assessed intraoperatively in the supine position with various respiratory maneuvers. Five patients who agreed to participate in long-term follow-up received a dual-chamber generator and were evaluated periodically over a 12-month period. Mean atrial sensitivity was 2.35 ±0.83 mV at the time of implantation. Effective atrial stimulation was possible in all patients at the time of implantation (mean stimulation threshold 3.08 ±1.04 V @ 0.5 ms [bipolar], 3.34 ±0.95 V @ 0.5 ms [unipolar]). Five of the 20 patients received a Kappa KDR701 generator, and atrial electrical properties were followed up over a 1-year period. There was no significant change in atrial pacing threshold or incidence of phrenic nerve stimulation over the 1-year follow-up. A standard single-pass VDD pacing lead system was capable of DDD pacing intraoperatively and during long-term follow-up. Despite higher than usual thresholds via the atrial dipole, pacemaker telemetry revealed <10% use of atrial pacing dipole over a 12-month period, which would minimally deplete the pacemaker’s battery. In addition, the telemetry confirmed appropriate sensing and pacing of the atrial dipole throughout the study period. At this time such systems can serve as back-up DDD pacing systems with further refinements required to optimize atrial thresholds in all patients.

Angiology, Vol. 56, No. 3, 323-329 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/000331970505600313


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?