No abstract

Background Many algorithms have been developed to ensure the safety and accuracy of cardiac implantable electric devices (CIED). A specific algorithm designed to prevent pacemaker induced tachycardia (PMT) after a premature ventricular complex (PVC response) is available in all Abbott (former St. Jude Medical) CIED. However, a few case reports suggest that this algorithm may be proarrhythmic when programmed to Atrial Pace (A‐Pace on PVC). Methods We analyzed the data of all (n = 333) Abbot implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization defibrillator (CRT‐D) devices followed remote using the Merlin.net Patient Care Network in our institute in 2020. Status of the PVC response algorithm A‐Pace on PVC or Off was collected, and all atrial mode switch (AMS) episodes longer than 30 s were thoroughly evaluated. Data on clinical characteristics of the patients was collect from the electronic patient records. Results A total of 173 patients had A‐Pace on PVC and twenty‐five of them (14%) had at least one atrial high rate episode (AHRE) >30 s (AHRE) triggered by the action of this algorithm. The median PVC count was higher in patients who had algorithm triggered AHRE than in those with no algorithm‐triggered AHRE (1.7% [IQR 0–3.2] vs. 0% [IQR 0–1.1], p < .0001). The major clinical characteristics were comparable in the two groups. Conclusion The A‐Pace on PVC setting was frequently used in our patients. Our study shows that a considerable number of patients had at least one AHRE triggered by the algorithm. The use of this algorithm should be carefully reconsidered.