RT-106

14th International Congress
THE "NEW FRONTIERS"
OF ARRHYTHMIAS 2000

Jan. 29 - Feb. 5, 2000
Marilleva, Trento, Italy

RT-106

Single-chamber versus dual-chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators for prevention of tachyarrhythmias: a proposed trial

Stefano Favale, Ursula Appl*, Frida Nacci, Luciano Sallusti**, Luigi de Luca Tuppati Schinosa.
Arrhythmia Service-Cardiosurgery, Unit-Department of Emergency and Transplantation, University of Bari, Italy, *Guidant Europe, **Guidant Italy

Abstract

Dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator may allow advantages in managing patients at risk of tachyarrhythmic death favouring a reduction of inappropriate interventions due to atrial tachyarrhythmias, a greater hemodynamic stability and a more appropriate stimulation in cases with the evolution toward bradycardia and/or atrio-ventricular block.
The algorithm using atrial sensing can increase specificity in ventricular tachycardia recognition while atrial pacing can provide better atrial electrical stability which can be further increased by drugs.
In patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction an improvement in left ventricular function obtained by dual-chamber stimulation, eventually biventricular, could determine a reduction in non-sudden deaths and prolong life expectancy. DDD pacing in these cases is thought to provide adequate chronotropism, optimal delay in the atrio-ventricular sequence, a more adequate left ventricular volume, higher atrial stability and to allow a wider use of betablockers.
Moreover, while the need for pacing may not seem necessary at the time of cardioverter-defibrillator implantation, the serious cardiac pathology present in the majority of patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias can be complicated after implantation by sinus node dysfunction or atrioventricular block.
In patients with left ventricular dysfunction and indication for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, not needing pacing and taking carvedilol, a prospective and randomized comparison is proposed: consistent DDDR implantable cardioverter-defibrillator vs back-up DDI implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.
The primary objective of the study is to demonstrate that the occurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia is reduced by DDDR consistent pacing compared with back up DDI pacing. Secondary objective is to register embolic events, ventricular arrhythmias, hospitalization due to cardiac causes, quality of life score, sudden cardiac deaths, non sudden cardiac deaths and all cause mortality.

Key Words


 

forward

CARDIOnet® - registered trade mark name
Copyright © 1996-2000 by CARDIOnet. All rights reserved.