Pacemaker with atrial as opposed to ventricular stimulation in patients with sick sinus syndrome;Syg sinusknude-syndrom: Pacemakerbehandling med stimulation i atrium versus ventrikel

Ugeskrift for Laeger

Volumn 158, Issue 8, 1996, Pages 1062-1067

  Andersen, Henning Rud ^a   Thuesen, Leif ^a   Bagger, Jens Peder ^a   Vesterlund, Thomas ^a   Thomsen, Poul Erik Bloch ^a  

^a AARHUS UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL HEART PACEMAKER; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEART ATRIUM; HEART VENTRICLE; HUMAN; MALE; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SICK SINUS SYNDROME;

AGED; FEMALE; HEART ATRIA; HEART VENTRICLES; HUMANS; MALE; PACEMAKER, ARTIFICIAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SICK SINUS SYNDROME;

EID: 0030593067     PISSN: 00415782     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bernstein AD, Parsonnet V. Survey of cardiac pacing in the United States in 1989. Am J Cardiol 1992; 69:331-8.
2. Rosenqvist M, Brandt J, Schüller H. Long-term pacing in sinus node disease: effects of stimulation mode on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Am Heart J 1988; 116: 16-22.
3. Stangl K, Seitz K, Wirtzfeld A, Alt E, Blömer H. Differences between atrial single chamber pacing (AAI) and ventricular single chamber pacing (VVI) with respect to prognosis and antiarrhythmic effect in patients with sick sinus syndrome. PACE 1990; 13:2080-5.
4. Zanini R, Facchinetti AI, Gallo G, Cazzamalli L, Bonandi L, Cas LD. Morbidity and mortality of patients with sinus node disease: comparative effects of atrial and ventricular pacing. PACE 1990; 13:2076-9.
5. Hesselson AB, Parsonnet V, Bernstein AD, Bonavita GJ. Deleterious effects of long-term single-chamber ventricular pacing in patients with sick sinus syndrome: the hidden benefits of dual-chamber pacing. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19:1542-9.
6. Sasaki Y, Shimotori M, Akahane K, Yonekura H, Hirano K. Endok R et al. Long-term follow-up of patients with sick sinus syndrome: a comparison of clinical aspects among unpaced, ventricular inhibited paced, and physiologically paced groups. PACE 1988; 11: 1575-83.
7. Stone JM, Bhakta RD, Lutgen J. Dual chamber sequential pacing management of sinus node dysfunction: advantages over single-chamber pacing. Am Heart J 1982; 104: 1319-27.
8. Santini M, Alexidou G, Ansalone G, Cacciatore G, Cini R, Turitto G. Relation of prognosis in sick sinus syndrome to age, conduction defects and modes of permanent cardiac pacing. Am J Cardiol 1990; 65: 729-35.
9. Markewitz A, Schad N, Hemmer W, Bernheim C, Ciavolella M, Weinhold C. What is the most appropriate stimulation mode in patients with sinus node dysfunction? PACE 1986; 9: 1115-20.
10. Kubica J, Stolarczyk L, Krzyminska E, Krasowski R, Raczak G, Lubinski A et al. Left atrial size and wall motion in patients with permanent ventricular and atrial pacing. PACE 1990; 13: 1737-41.
11. Lamas GA, Estes III NM, Schneller S, Flaker GC. Does dual chamber or atrial pacing prevent atrial fibrillation? The need for a randomized controlled trial. PACE 1992; 15:1109-13.
12. Petersen P, Boysen G, Godtfredsen J, Andersen ED, Andersen B. Placebo-controlled, randomized trial of warfarin and Aspirin for prevention of thromboembolic complications in chronic atrial fibrillation: The Copenhagen AFASAK Study. Lancet 1989; 1: 175-9.
13. Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Investigators. Stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation study: final results. Circulation 1991; 84:527-39.
14. Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Investigators. Predictors of thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation: I. Clinical features of patients at risk. Ann Intern Med 1992; 116:1-5.
15. Brandt J, Anderson H, Fåhraeus T, Schüller H. Natural history of sinus node disease treated with atrial pacing in 213 patients: implications for selection of stimulation mode. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 20:633-9.
16. Haywood GA, Ward J, Ward DE, Camm AJ. Atrioventricular Wenckebach point and progression to atrioventricular block in sinoatrial disease. PACE 1990; 13: 2054-8.
17. Askenazi J, Alexander JH, Koenigsberg DI, Belic N, Lesch M. Alteration of left ventricular performance by left bundle branch block simulated with atrioventricular sequential pacing. Am J Cardiol 1984; 53: 99-104.
18. Bedotto JB, Grayburn PA, Black WH, Raya TE, McBride W, Hsia HH et al. Alteration in left ventricular relaxation during atrioventricular pacing in humans. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990; 15: 658-64.
19. Rosenqvist M, Isaaz K, Botvinick EH, Dae MW, Cockrell J, Abbott JA et al. Relative importance of activation sequence compared to atrioventricular synchrony in left ventricular function. Am J Cardiol 1991; 67:148-56.
20. Andersen HR, Thuesen L, Bagger JP, Vesterlund T, Thomsen PEB. Atrial versus ventricular pacing [letter]. Lancet 1995; 345: 733-4.