Closed loop stimulation reduces the incidence of atrial high-rate episodes compared with conventional rate-adaptive pacing in patients with sinus node dysfunctions

Ennio C L Pisanò,Valeria Calvi,Miguel Viscusi,Antonio Rapacciuolo,Ludovico Lazzari,Luca Bontempi,Gemma Pelargonio,Giuseppe Arena,Vincenzo Caccavo,Chun-Chieh Wang,Béla Merkely,Lian-Yu Lin,Il-Young Oh,Emanuele Bertaglia,Davide Saporito,Maurizio Menichelli,Antonino Nicosia,Domenico M Carretta,Aldo Coppolino,Chi Keong Ching,Álvaro Marco Del Castillo,Xi Su,Martina Del Maestro,Daniele Giacopelli,Alessio Gargaro,Giovanni L Botto
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euae175
2024-07-02
Abstract:Aims: Subclinical atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with increased risk of progression to clinical AF, stroke, and cardiovascular death. We hypothesized that in pacemaker patients requiring dual-chamber rate-adaptive (DDDR) pacing, closed loop stimulation (CLS) integrated into the circulatory control system through intra-cardiac impedance monitoring would reduce the occurrence of atrial high-rate episodes (AHREs) compared with conventional DDDR pacing. Methods and results: Patients with sinus node dysfunctions (SNDs) and an implanted pacemaker or defibrillator were randomly allocated to dual-chamber CLS (n = 612) or accelerometer-based DDDR pacing (n = 598) and followed for 3 years. The primary endpoint was time to the composite endpoint of the first AHRE lasting ≥6 min, stroke, or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). All AHREs were independently adjudicated using intra-cardiac electrograms. The incidence of the primary endpoint was lower in the CLS arm (50.6%) than in the DDDR arm (55.7%), primarily due to the reduction in AHREs lasting between 6 h and 7 days. Unadjusted site-stratified hazard ratio (HR) for CLS vs. DDDR was 0.84 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-0.99; P = 0.035]. After adjusting for CHA2DS2-VASc score, the HR remained 0.84 (95% CI, 0.71-0.99; P = 0.033). In subgroup analyses of AHRE incidence, the incremental benefit of CLS was greatest in patients without atrioventricular block (HR, 0.77; P = 0.008) and in patients without AF history (HR, 0.73; P = 0.009). The contribution of stroke/TIA to the primary endpoint (1.3%) was low and not statistically different between study arms. Conclusion: Dual-chamber CLS in patients with SND is associated with a significantly lower AHRE incidence than conventional DDDR pacing.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?