• Pacing Clin Electrophysiol · Aug 2001

    Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical Trial

    A randomized study on the effects of pacemaker programming to a lower output on projected pulse generator longevity.

    • A Schuchert, T Meinertz, and Low Output Programming (LOP) Investigators.
    • Medical Clinic, Department of Cardiology, University-Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. schuchert@uke.uni-hamburg.de
    • Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2001 Aug 1;24(8 Pt 1):1234-9.

    AbstractThe programmability of cardiac pacemakers enables the physician at follow-up to adjust the pacing pulse under consideration of the 100% safety margin with respect to the individual pacing threshold. The purpose of reducing the output is to prolong pacemaker longevity. The aims of this prospective, randomized trial were to compare the effects of nominal output versus a lower output on projected pacemaker longevity in single and dual chamber pacemakers. The secondary aim was to assess how many patients can be programmed to 2.5 V/0.4 ms instead of the nominal 3.5-V setting with > or = 100% safety margin. The patients received the same types of VVI or DDD pacemakers that were connected in the ventricle to the steroid-eluting, high impedance pacing lead. At the 3-month follow-up, patients with ventricular pacing thresholds < or = 0.15 ms at 2.5-V pulse amplitude were randomized to 3.5 V or 2.5 V amplitude at 0.4-ms pulse duration. Lead function and projected device longevity were assessed with the pacemaker's telemetry 6 and 12 months after implantation. Of patients implanted with a VVI pacemaker, at the 3-month follow-up, 3 patients had pacing thresholds > 0.15 ms at 2.5 V and 139 patients could be randomized. A reprogramming to a higher output was necessary in one patient. The mean percentage of ventricular pacing was about 40% throughout the study time. The programming to 2.5-V output resulted in an insignificant increase of device longevity from 117.9 +/- 18.7 months in the nominal group to 123.7 +/- 11.9 months at the 12-month follow-up (P = 0.16). Of patients implanted with a DDD pacemaker, 166 patients underwent randomization. The mean percentage of ventricular pacing was 85% in the ventricle and 35% in the atrium. The 2.5-V setting significantly prolonged pacemaker longevity from 98.1 +/- 21.3 to 112.0 +/- 13.6 months (P < 0.0001). In three (1%) patients a late increase of the pacing threshold was observed. Due to the low ventricular pacing thresholds, the 2.5-V/0.4-ms setting provided, 3 months after implantation, a > or = 100% safety margin in 99% of the patients. Programming to a lower output slightly increased projected pacemaker longevity compared to the nominal 3.5-V setting. Longevity increasedfor 5% in patients with single andfor 14% in dual chamber pulse generators.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.