Permanent atrial fibrillation in patients with a dual‑chamber pacemaker

Abstract

BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation (AF) is thought to be a progressive arrhythmia. The impact of sex and position of right ventricular lead is not well recognized. Whilst nonparoxysmal AF compared with paroxysmal AF has been associated with increased mortality in the general population, its prognostic significance in patients with a dual -chamber (DDD) pacemaker is less clear. AIMS The aim of the study was to determine the incidence of permanent AF in patients with a DDD pacemaker, analyze the effect of selected baseline characteristics on permanent AF development, and examine the impact of permanent AF on patient survival. METHODS A retrospective cohort study included 3932 consecutive patients who underwent DDD pacing system implantation between 1984 and 2014. Follow -up was completed in August 2016. We included 3771 patients (96%) with post -operative follow -up and known vital status. Occurrence of permanent AF and all -cause mortality were the study endpoints. RESULTS During mean follow -up of 6.5 years, permanent AF occurred in 717 patients (19%). Sex (hazard ratio [HR], 1.316; 95% CI, 1.134-1.528, for men), age at implant (HR, 1.041; 95% CI, 1.033-1.049, 1-year increase), history of AF (HR, 3.521; 95% CI, 3.002-4.128) were independently associated with permanent AF development, whereas position of right ventricular lead (apical versus nonapical) and primary pacing indication (atrioventricular block versus sick sinus syndrome) were not related to permanent AF. Permanent AF was a significant risk factor for increased mortality (age-and sex -adjusted HR, 1.475; 95% CI, 1.294-1.682). CONCLUSIONS Permanent AF occurrence was independently predicted by advanced age at implant, male sex, and preexisting AF and associated with worse survival.

The role of pacemaker algorithms in preventing atrial fibrillation progression

“…The results of our study (group A) as regards the non significant role in apical versus septal lead position as a risk for AF development p value 0.058 were in agreement with Dębski et al (2019). During the follow up period in group A VIP on there was high significance in drcreasing RV pacing P-value 0.001 that is consistent with Yadav et al (2015) as mentioned before and no effect on AF risk mostly due to the short duration of the follow up.…”