Effectiveness of Ventricular Intrinsic Preference (VIP™) and Ventricular AutoCapture (VAC) algorithms in pacemaker patients: Results of the validate study

Autor: Upendra Kaul, Shirish Hiremath, Rakesh Yadav, Sridevi Chennapragada, Sumit Anand, Dhiman Kahali, Jitendra S. Makkar, Aparna Jaswal, Naresh K. Sood, Prakash Kamath, Anil K. Mishra
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2015
Předmět:
Zdroj: Journal of Arrhythmia
Journal of Arrhythmia, Vol 32, Iss 1, Pp 29-35 (2016)
ISSN: 1883-2148
1880-4276
Popis: Background: Several past clinical studies have demonstrated that frequent and unnecessary right ventricular pacing in patients with sick sinus syndrome and compromised atrio-ventricular conduction (AVC) produces long-term adverse effects. The safety and efficacy of two pacemaker algorithms, Ventricular Intrinsic Preference™ (VIP) and Ventricular AutoCapture (VAC), were evaluated in a multi-center study in pacemaker patients. Methods: We evaluated 80 patients across 10 centers in India. Patients were enrolled within 15 days of dual chamber pacemaker (DDDR) implantation, and within 45 days thereafter were classified to either a compromised AVC (cAVC) arm or an intact AVC (iAVC) arm based on intrinsic paced/sensed (AV/PV) delays. In each arm, patients were then randomized (1:1) into the following groups: VIP OFF and VAC OFF (Control group; CG), or VIP ON and VAC ON (Treatment Group; TG). Subsequently, the AV/PV delays in the CG groups were mandatorily programmed at 180/150 ms, and to up to 350 ms in the TG groups. The percentage of right ventricular pacing (%RVp) evaluated at 12-month post-implantation follow-ups were compared between the two groups in each arm. Additionally, in-clinic time required for collecting device data was compared between patients programmed with the automated AutoCapture algorithm activated (VAC ON) vs. the manually programmed method (VAC OFF). Results: Patients randomized to the TG with the VIP algorithm activated exhibited a significantly lower %RVp at 12 months than those in the CG in both the cAVC arm (39±41% vs. 97±3%; p=0.0004) and the iAVC arm (15±25% vs. 68±39%; p=0.0067). In-clinic time required to collect device data was less in patients with the VAC algorithm activated. No device-related adverse events were reported during the year-long study period. Conclusions: In our study cohort, the use of the VIP algorithm significantly reduced the %RVp, while the VAC algorithm reduced in-clinic time needed to collect device data.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: