Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 6, 2026

Optimization of Transesophageal Atrial Pacing to Assess Atrial Fibrillation Susceptibility in Mice
Published on: June 29, 2022
The efficacy of ventricular pacing with device automaticity in paediatric patients
Maren Tomaske1, Paul Harpes, Natascha Woy
1Division of Paediatric Cardiology, University Children's Hospital, Steinwiesstrasse 75, 8032 Zurich, Switzerland. maren.tomaske@kispi.uzh.ch
Insights
Pacemaker reprogramming was significantly lower in children with AutoCapture (AC) devices compared to conventional (Conv) programming. AutoCapture effectively controlled ventricular output, with no difference in re-intervention rates between the two pacemaker groups.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric cardiology
- Medical device technology
- Electrophysiology
Background:
- Pacemaker technology in pediatric patients requires careful programming to ensure optimal function and minimize interventions.
- AutoCapture (AC) is an advanced pacemaker feature designed to automate certain programming aspects, potentially improving device reliability.
- Conventional (Conv) pacemaker programming requires regular adjustments and monitoring.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the rates of pacemaker reprogramming and re-intervention in pediatric patients with AutoCapture (AC) devices versus conventionally programmed (Conv) devices.
- To evaluate the reliability and effectiveness of AutoCapture's automaticity in pediatric pacemaker management.
Main Methods:
- A retrospective analysis of pediatric patients with AC (n=49) and Conv (n=41) programmed devices.
- Screening of 1106 outpatient visits and 147 Holter recordings for device reprogramming and re-intervention events.
- Statistical comparison of freedom from reprogramming and re-intervention rates at 2 and 5 years between the two groups.
Main Results:
- Significantly higher freedom from reprogramming at 2 and 5 years for AC devices (63%/35%) compared to Conv devices (13%/4%) (P < 0.0001).
- Lower mean yearly reprogramming rate in the AC group (0.67 ± 0.55) versus the Conv group (1.13 ± 0.82) (P = 0.005).
- No significant difference in freedom from re-intervention between AC and Conv groups (95%/90% vs. 95%/85%, P = 0.26).
Conclusions:
- AutoCapture-programmed devices demonstrate favorable freedom from and yearly rates of reprogramming in pediatric patients.
- AutoCapture effectively controlled ventricular output, and no difference in invasive re-intervention rates was observed between AC and Conv groups.
- Despite AC benefits, structured device follow-up and Holter monitoring remain essential for all pediatric pacemaker patients.
Aims:
To compare pacemaker reprogramming and re-intervention rates in children with AutoCapture (AC) and conventionally (Conv) programmed devices, and to assess reliability of device automaticity.
Methods And Results:
Data of children with AC (group AC, n = 49) and conventionally programmed devices (group Conv, n = 41) were analysed. A total of 1106 outpatient visits and 147 Holter recordings were screened for device reprogramming and invasive re-intervention. At 2 and 5 years, freedom from reprogramming differed significantly between groups (AC: 63/35% vs. Conv: 13/4%; P < 0.0001), whereas freedom from re-intervention was not different (AC: 95/90% vs. Conv: 95/85%; P = 0.26). Mean yearly rate of reprogramming was lower in group AC (AC: 0.67 +/- 0.55 vs. Conv: 1.13 +/- 0.82; P = 0.005). Follow-up duration correlated with a decreasing number of reprogramming per year in group Conv (rho = -0.73, P < 0.001). No ventricular output reprogramming was required in group AC. Holter recordings required 0.07 +/- 0.13 reprogramming per year in group Conv, none in group AC (P < 0.001). Holter-detected lead dysfunction prompted re-intervention in one patient of each group.
Conclusion:
Estimated freedom from as well as total yearly rate of device reprogramming was favourable for AC-programmed devices. No difference was seen for the incidence of invasive re-interventions. AC ventricular output control was effective. Structured device follow-up and Holter recordings in specific patient groups remain mandatory for all devices in paediatric patients.
Related Concept Videos
ECG Interpretation of Arrhythmias II: Atrial, Junctional and Ventricular Arrhythmias
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation III: AED Use
Dysrhythmias III: Characteristics of Dysrhythmias
Dysrhythmias VI: Management of Dysrhythmias
Dysrhythmias IV: Characteristics of Bradyarrhythmias
Conduction System of the Heart
The pacemaker cells are located in two primary nodes: the sinoatrial (SA) node and the atrioventricular (AV) node. The SA node pacemaker cells can autonomously depolarize, triggering an action potential that leads to the...

