Circulation Journal
Online ISSN : 1347-4820
Print ISSN : 1346-9843
ISSN-L : 1346-9843

This article has now been updated. Please use the final version.

Survival Analysis in Patients With Preserved Left Ventricular Function and Standard Indications for Permanent Cardiac Pacing Randomized to Right Ventricular Apical or Septal Outflow Tract Pacing
Alicja Dabrowska-KugackaEwa Lewicka-NowakSebastian TyburaRajmund WilczekJustyna StaniewiczPawel ZagozdzonAnna FaranDariusz KozlowskiGrzegorz RaczakGrazyna Swiatecka
Author information
JOURNAL FREE ACCESS Advance online publication

Article ID: CJ-09-0084

Details
Abstract

Background: Optimal right ventricular (RV) pacing site in patients referred for permanent cardiac pacing remains controversial. A prospective randomized trial was done to compare long-term effect of permanent RV apex (RVA) vs RV outflow tract (RVOT) pacing on the all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Methods and Results: A total of 122 consecutive patients (70 men, 69 ±11 years), with standard pacing indications were randomized to RVA (66 patients) or RVOT (56 patients) ventricular lead placement. After the 10-year follow-up period the mortality data were summarized on the basis of an intention-to-treat analysis. During the long-term follow-up, 31 patients from the RVA group died vs 24 patients in the RVOT group (hazard ratio (HR), 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.57-1.65; P=0.89). There were 10 cardiovascular deaths in the RVA and 12 in the RVOT group (HR, 1.04; 95%CI, 0.45-2.41; P=0.93). There were no differences in the all-cause or cardiovascular mortality between the pacing sites after adjustment for age, gender, arterial hypertension, atrial fibrillation, New York Heart Association class and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter. Conclusions: The RVOT provides no additional benefit in terms of long-term survival over RVA pacing.

Content from these authors
© 2009 THE JAPANESE CIRCULATION SOCIETY
feedback
Top