We studied heart rate response and blood lactate changes during treadmill exercise testing in 10 patients with sick sinus syndrome (SSS) and normal atrioventricular (AV) conduction in whom an activity detecting multi‐programmable rate responsive pacemaker was implanted for atrial pacing (AAI pacing). Treadmill exercise testing was performed twice in each patient under the two different AAI pacing modes: rate responsive function off (fixed rate 60 pulses per minute [ppm]; RR‐off) and rate responsive function on (rate response 10, activity threshold medium, basic rate 60 ppm, and maximum rate 150 ppm; RR‐on). Chronotropic response and blood lactate change during exercise were compared among patients under each pacing mode and eight healthy volunteers of ages matching those of the patients. In patients under the RR‐off pacing mode (RR‐off patients), chronotropic response was lower (P < 0.01) and blood lactate level was higher (P < 0.05) than those in patients under the RR‐on pacing mode (RR‐on patients) and volunteers during exercise. In RR‐on patients, however, both chronotropic response and lactate level changes during exercise were comparatively improved, with no significant differences between RR‐on patients and volunteers. These data suggested that improvement of chronotropic response by rate responsive pacing, in comparison with nonrate responsive pacing, increased the blood supply to the working muscles and resulted in less lactate production during exercise. It was concluded that rate responsive AAI pacing which could maintain AV synchrony and normal intraventricular conduction was an optimal physiological pacing mode for SSS patients with normal AV conduction.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.