Safety and efficacy of AAIR pacing in selected patients with sick sinus syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The DANPACE study suggested implanting dual-pacing dual-sensing dual-response rate-adaptive (DDDR) pacemakers in patients with sick sinus syndrome, even though 90.7% of their atrial-pacing atrial-sensing inhibited-response rate-adaptive (AAIR) group did not require upgrade. Most centers implant DDDR pacemakers due to risk of future atrioventricular (AV) block. Given that AAIR pacemakers are less expensive, have one less lead with potentially one less point of complication, we question whether DDDR pacemakers are superior to AAIR pacemakers. We aim to describe long-term outcomes of AAIR implants. METHODS: Patients presenting to the Grey Nuns Hospital in Edmonton, Canada from 1990 to 2012 with sick sinus syndrome without AV block had AAIR pacemakers implanted. Outcomes that were measured over the follow-up time included need for ventricular lead reoperation, incidence of AV block and incidence of sudden cardiac death from AV block. RESULTS: During this period, 330 patients presented with sick sinus syndrome. Eighty-seven (26.4%) patients met criteria for and received AAIR pacemakers. Seventy-eight (91.8%) did not require upgrade over mean follow-up of 10.6 ± 0.6 years. Amongst this group, 31 patients (39.7%) were alive, whereas 47 (60.3%) were deceased at end of follow-up due to other comorbidities. No sudden deaths were attributable to AV block. Only 7 patients (8.2%) required ventricular lead reoperation: 2 (2.4%) presented urgently with symptomatic AV block; 3 (3.5%) had atrial fibrillation requiring beta-blockade; 1 (1.2%) had atrial lead dislodgment; and 1 (1.2%) was electively upgraded at battery end-of-life. CONCLUSIONS: This study looks at safety of AAIR pacemakers with only 2.4% of patients developing AV block requiring urgent upgrade. Approximately 91.8% of patients remained with their original AAIR pacemakers (mean follow-up 10.6 vs 5.4 years in DANPACE). Our findings are similar to the DANPACE study but our conclusions are different as we believe AAIR pacing should be considered for selected patients with sick sinus syndrome without AV block.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".