Levy T, Walker S, Rex S, Paul V
Department of Cardiology, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust, Harefield Hospital, Middlesex UB9 6JH, Harefield, UK.
Int J Cardiol. 2000 Aug;75(1):91-7. doi: 10.1016/s0167-5273(00)00303-x.
The role of atrial overdrive pacing for the suppression of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation remains unclear. To investigate this we have performed a randomised study evaluating the role of an increased atrial base rate in suppressing this arrhythmia in patients implanted with a permanent pacemaker (Chorum ELA) for sick sinus syndrome with previous documented paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Twenty-seven patients (mean age, 69; 15 female) were randomised to two 3-month single-blinded crossover periods of DDDR pacing. The pacemaker was set with a base rate of 60 bpm (normal) during one period and at 10 bpm (overdrive) above the average heart rate during the other, mean (S.D.) 75+/-7 beats/min (range, 70-96). The fallback algorithm of the pacemaker was activated to record the number and duration of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation episodes. During the overdrive period there was a significant increase in the total duration of atrial pacing (normal 60+/-26% vs. overdrive 72+/-28%, P<0.001). However there was no significant difference in the number of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation episodes (normal 43+/-109 vs. overdrive 43+/-106, P=ns), or their total duration (normal 42+/-108 h vs. overdrive 99+/-254 h, P=ns). In conclusion, atrial overdrive pacing, achieved by increasing the atrial base rate, has no incremental benefit in the suppression of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation when compared to rate responsive pacing with a base rate of 60 bpm.
