Advertisement

Device Therapy for Bradycardias

Chapter

Abstract

The number of patients who can benefit from implantable cardiac pacemaker for the treatment of bradycardia is steadily increasing due to the ageing population. Over the past 50 years, there have been remarkable technological advances in the pacing technology. Current pacemakers have extended battery longevity and are equipped with complex device features including advanced telemetry monitoring (wireless, home monitoring), auto-programmability, and multiple rate-adaptive sensor technology. Furthermore, new-generation leads have steroid-eluting tips and better surface coating to reduce long-term pacing threshold and increase their lifespan, respectively. These advances should further improve patient care for treatment of bradycardias; nevertheless, the optimal pacing sites for ventricular pacing as well as the clinical benefit of remote monitoring need to be further studied.

Keywords

Remote Monitoring Ventricular Pace Biventricular Pace Sinus Node Dysfunction Pace Lead 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Bernstein AD, Daubert JC, Fletcher RD, Hayes DL, Lüderitz B, Reynolds DW, Schoenfeld MH, Sutton R. The revised NASPE/BPEG generic code for antibradycardia, adaptive-rate, and multisite pacing. North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology/British Pacing and Electrophysiology Group. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2002;25:260–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cano O, Muñoz B, Tejada D, Osca J, Sancho-Tello MJ, Olagüe J, Castro JE, Salvador A. Evaluation of a new standardized protocol for the perioperative management of chronically anticoagulated patients receiving implantable cardiac arrhythmia devices. Heart Rhythm. 2012;9:361–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Connolly SJ, Kerr CR, Gent M, Roberts RS, Yusuf S, Gillis AM, Sami MH, Talajic M, Tang AS, Klein GJ, Lau C, Newman DM. Effects of physiologic pacing versus ventricular pacing on the risk of stroke and death due to cardiovascular causes. Canadian Trial of Physiologic Pacing Investigators. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1385–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Epstein AE, DiMarco JP, Ellenbogen KA, Estes NA, Freedman RA, Gettes LS, Gillinov AM, Gregoratos G, Hammill SC, Hayes DL, Hlatky MA, Newby LK, Page RL, Schoenfeld MH, Silka MJ, Stevenson LW, Sweeney MO, Smith Jr SC, Jacobs AK, Adams CD, Anderson JL, Buller CE, Creager MA, Ettinger SM, Faxon DP, Halperin JL, Hiratzka LF, Hunt SA, Krumholz HM, Kushner FG, Lytle BW, Nishimura RA, Ornato JP, Page RL, Riegel B, Tarkington LG, Yancy CW, American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the ACC/AHA/NASPE, American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 Guideline Update for Implantation of Cardiac Pacemakers and Antiarrhythmia Devices), American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Society of Thoracic Surgeons. ACC/AHA/HRS 2008 Guidelines for Device-Based Therapy of Cardiac Rhythm Abnormalities: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 Guideline Update for Implantation of Cardiac Pacemakers and Antiarrhythmia Devices): developed in collaboration with the American Association for Thoracic Surgery and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation. 2008;117:e350–408.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Erlebacher JA, Cahill PT, Pannizzo F, Knowles RJ. Effect of magnetic resonance imaging on DDD pacemakers. Am J Cardiol. 1986;57:437–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Folino AF, Chiusso F, Zanotto G, Vaccari D, Gasparini G, Megna A, Marras E, Mantovan R, Vaglio A, Boscolo G, Biancalana G, Leoni L, Iliceto S, Buja G. Management of alert messages in the remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter defibrillators and pacemakers: an Italian single-region study. Europace. 2011;13:1281–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Furman S, Schwedel JB. An intracardiac pacemaker for Stokes-Adams seizures. N Engl J Med. 1959;261:943–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gimbel JR. Unexpected asystole during 3T magnetic resonance imaging of a pacemaker-dependent patient with a “modern” pacemaker. Europace. 2009;11:1241–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hayes DL, Holmes Jr DR, Gray JE. Effect of 1.5 tesla nuclear magnetic resonance imaging scanner on implanted permanent pacemakers. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1987;10:782–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kalin R, Stanton MS. Current clinical issues for MRI scanning of pacemaker and defibrillator patients. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2005;28:326–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Karlof I. Haemodynamic effect of atrial triggered versus fixed rate pacing at rest and during exercise in complete heart block. Acta Med Scand. 1975;197:195–206.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lamas GA, Orav EJ, Stambler BS, Ellenbogen KA, Sgarbossa EG, Huang SKS, Marinchak RA, Estes 3rd NAM, Mitchell GF, Lieberman EH, Mangione CM, Goldman L. Quality of life and clinical outcomes in elderly patients treated with ventricular pacing as compared with dual-chamber pacing. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:1097–104.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee KL, Lau CP, Tse HF, Echt DS, Heaven D, Smith W, Hood M. First human demonstration of cardiac stimulation with transcutaneous ultrasound energy delivery: implications for wireless pacing with implantable devices. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:877–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mond HG, Proclemer A. The 11th world survey of cardiac pacing and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: calendar year 2009 – a World Society of Arrhythmia’s project. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2011;34:1013–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nazarian S, Roguin A, Zviman MM, Lardo AC, Dickfeld TL, Calkins H, Weiss RG, Berger RD, Bluemke DA, Halperin HR. Clinical utility and safety of a protocol for noncardiac and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging of patients with permanent pacemakers and implantable-cardioverter defibrillators at 1.5 tesla. Circulation. 2006;114:1277–84.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Siu CW, Wang M, Zhang XH, Lau CP, Tse HF. Analysis of ventricular performance as a function of pacing site and mode. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2008;51:171–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Toff WD, Camm AJ, Skehan JD. Single-chamber versus dual-chamber pacing for high-grade atrioventricular block. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:145–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tse HF, Lau CP. Clinical trials for cardiac pacing in bradycardia: the end or the beginning? Circulation. 2006;114:3–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tse HF, Lau CP. Sensors for implantable devices: ideal characteristics, sensor combination, and automaticity. In: Ellenbogen KA, Wilkoff BL, Kay GN, Lau CP, editors. Clinical cardiac pacing, defibrillation, and resynchronization therapy. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2007. p. 201–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vardas PE, Auricchio A, Blanc JJ, Daubert JC, Drexler H, Ector H, Gasparini M, Linde C, Morgado FB, Oto A, Sutton R, Trusz-Gluza M, European Society of Cardiology, European Heart Rhythm Association. Guidelines for cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy: The Task Force for Cardiac Pacing and Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association. Eur Heart J. 2007;28:2256–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wilkoff BL, Auricchio A, Brugada J, Cowie M, Ellenbogen KA, Gillis AM, Hayes DL, Howlett JG, Kautzner J, Love CJ, Morgan JM, Priori SG, Reynolds DW, Schoenfeld MH, Vardas PE, Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), American College of Cardiology (ACC), American Heart Association (AHA), European Society of Cardiology (ESC), Heart Failure Association of ESC (HFA), Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA), HRS/EHRA Expert Consensus on the Monitoring of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs): description of techniques, indications, personnel, frequency and ethical considerations: developed in partnership with the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA); and in collaboration with the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), the Heart Failure Association of ESC (HFA), and the Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA). Endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society, the European Heart Rhythm Association (a registered branch of the ESC), the American College of Cardiology, the American Heart Association. Europace. 2008;10:707–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cardiology Division, Department of MedicineThe University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong KongHong KongRepublic of China

Personalised recommendations