Cardiovascular Outcomes With Atrial-Based Pacing Compared With Ventricular Pacing
- 4 July 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Cell Metabolism
- Vol. 114 (1), 11-17
- https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.105.610303
Abstract
Several randomized trials have compared atrial-based (dual-chamber or atrial) pacing with ventricular pacing in patients with bradycardia. No trial has shown a mortality reduction, and only 1 small trial suggested a reduction in stroke. The goal of this review was to determine whether atrial-based pacing prevents major cardiovascular events. A systematic review was performed of publications since 1980. For inclusion, trials had to compare an atrial-based with a ventricular-based pacing mode; use a randomized, controlled, parallel design; and have data on mortality, stroke, heart failure, or atrial fibrillation. Individual patient data were obtained from 5 of the 8 identified studies, representing 95% of patients in the 8 trials, and a total of 35 000 patient-years of follow-up. There was no significant heterogeneity among the results of the individual trials. There was no significant reduction in mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 1.03; P=0.19) or heart failure (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.03; P=0.15) with atrial-based pacing. There was a significant reduction in atrial fibrillation (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.89; P=0.00003) and a reduction in stroke that was of borderline significance (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.99; P=0.035). There was no convincing evidence that any patient subgroup received special benefit from atrial-based pacing. Compared with ventricular pacing, the use of atrial-based pacing does not improve survival or reduce heart failure or cardiovascular death. However, atrial-based pacing reduces the incidence of atrial fibrillation and may modestly reduce stroke.Keywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- Cost-Effectiveness of Dual-Chamber Pacing Compared With Ventricular Pacing for Sinus Node DysfunctionCirculation, 2005
- Ventricular Pacing or Dual-Chamber Pacing for Sinus-Node DysfunctionNew England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- Effects of Physiologic Pacing versus Ventricular Pacing on the Risk of Stroke and Death Due to Cardiovascular CausesNew England Journal of Medicine, 2000
- CLINICAL TRIALS OF PACING MODE SELECTIONCardiology Clinics, 2000
- Quality of Life and Clinical Outcomes in Elderly Patients Treated with Ventricular Pacing as Compared with Dual-Chamber PacingNew England Journal of Medicine, 1998
- Influence of pacing modalities on the incidence of atrial fibrillation in patients without prior atrial fibrillation. A prospective studyEuropean Heart Journal, 1998
- Long-term follow-up of patients from a randomised trial of atrial versus ventricular pacing for sick-sinus syndromeThe Lancet, 1997
- The Impact of Pulse Generator Longevity on the Long-Term Costs of Cardiac PacingPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 1996
- Prospective randomised trial of atrial versus ventricular pacing in sick-sinus syndromeThe Lancet, 1994
- USE OF EXTERNAL ELECTRIC PACEMAKER IN CARDIAC ARRESTJournal of the American Medical Association, 1955