• P Geelen, A Lorga Filho, M Chauvin, F Wellens, and P Brugada.
• Cardiovascular Center, O.L.V.-Hospital, Aalst, Belgium.
• Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1997 Jan 1;20(1 Pt 2):177-81.

AbstractAlthough the beneficial effects of DDD pacing are well known, currently available ICDs provide only fixed rate ventricular antibradycardia pacing. In a consecutive series of 139 patients with ICDs, we have analyzed the need for antibradycardia pacing and the indications for DDD pacing. We also report our initial experience with the Defender 9001 (ELA Medical, France) DDD-ICD. Out of 139 patients, 25 (18%) were in need of antibradycardia pacing. Ten patients already had a pacemaker at the time of ICD implantation and ten other patients had a conventional pacemaker indication at that time. Five patients became pacemaker dependent during a follow-up of 20 +/- 8 months. The disorders necessitating pacemaker therapy were high degree AV conduction disturbances in 72%, sick sinus syndrome in 12%, and AF with a slow ventricular response in 16% of patients. Based upon current indications, DDD pacing was indicated in 20 (80%) of 25 patients. The Defender 9001 DDD-ICD (ELA Medical) was used in two patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and pacemaker syndrome with VVI pacing. Cardiac output during DDD pacing increased by 36% in one patient with an increase in VO2 max during exercise of 29%. The other patient showed an increase in cardiac output of 50% with DDD pacing, and, while unable to exercise with VVI pacing, had a VO2max of 24 mL/kg per minute during DDD pacing. Up to 18% of our ICD patients are in need of antibradycardia pacing. Of these pacemaker dependent patients, 80% have an indication for DDD pacing. Our first clinical experience with a DDD-ICD confirms the hemodynamic benefit of AV synchronous pacing in ICD patients with pacemaker syndrome.

43 keywords...

hide…