Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 27, 2026

Optimization of Transesophageal Atrial Pacing to Assess Atrial Fibrillation Susceptibility in Mice
Published on: June 29, 2022
Effectiveness of atrial versus atrioventricular pacing for sick sinus syndrome during long-term follow-up
Marcin Kuniewicz, Anna Rydlewska, Grzegorz Karkowski
1Jagiellonian University, School of Medicine, Institute of Cardiology, Department of Electrocardiology, The John Paul II Hospital in Cracow.. jlelakow@szpitaljp2.krakow.pl.
Insights
Atrial pacing (AAI) is safe for sick sinus syndrome (SSS) but may require ventricular lead implantation. Dual-chamber pacing (DDD) and AAI showed similar survival and complication rates, though AAI had more reoperations.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Electrophysiology
- Medical Device Technology
Background:
- Current guidelines favor dual-chamber (DDD) pacing over atrial pacing (AAI) for sick sinus syndrome (SSS).
- Long-term outcomes of AAI versus DDD pacing in SSS patients require further comparative analysis.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the long-term outcomes of AAI and DDD pacing in patients diagnosed with sick sinus syndrome (SSS).
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of medical records for 809 patients (86 AAI, 723 DDD) who underwent pacemaker implantation for SSS.
- Evaluation of outcomes including survival, reoperation rates, lead complications, and development of atrial fibrillation (AF).
Main Results:
- No significant difference in survival, persistent atrial fibrillation (AF), or lead-related complications between AAI and DDD groups.
- Higher reoperation rates in the AAI group, primarily due to the need for ventricular lead implantation after developing atrioventricular block or persistent AF.
- Tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome and lack of antiarrhythmic therapy were significant risk factors for developing persistent AF.
Conclusions:
- Atrial pacing (AAI) is safe for SSS but carries a risk of ventricular lead implantation for atrioventricular block or persistent AF.
- Dual-chamber (DDD) and AAI pacing demonstrated comparable survival, AF development, and lead complication rates.
- Increased reoperations in AAI systems, particularly after four years, may support DDD system implantation for SSS.
Background:
According to the current guidelines, atrioventricular (DDD) pacing is superior to atrial pacing (AAI) in the treatment of sick sinus syndrome (SSS).
Aim:
To compare outcomes of AAI and DDD pacing in patients with SSS during long-term follow-up.
Methods:
We studied 809 patients, including 86 patients in the AAI group (57 women, mean age 65 ± 15 years) and 723 patients in the DDD group (406 women, mean age 71.5 ± 10 years). Evaluation of outcomes of AAI and DDD pacing in SSS was based on the analysis of medical records of patients who underwent pacemaker implantation.
Results:
Average duration of follow-up was 52 ± 25 months. In the AAI group, 63 of 86 patients remained without intervention. In the DDD group, 661 of 723 patients did not require surgical intervention. Overall, 105 patients died, including 13 in the AAI group and 92 in the DDD group (p = 0.4516). In the AAI group, a high degree atrioventricular block occurred on average after 46.3 ± 8.8 months and its incidence was estimated at 0.85% per year. Atrial fibrillation (AF) developed in 8 patients in the AAI group and 81 patients in the DDD group (p = 0.23). Among aetiological factors of an increased risk of developing AF, only the presence of tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome (hazard ratio [HR] 11.31) and the absence of antiarrhythmic therapy (HR 4.23) significantly increased the risk of AF. Urgent reoperation was needed in 23 patients in the AAI group and 62 patients in the DDD group (p < 0.01). Log-rank test analysis showed a significant effect of the development of AF on the risk of reoperation in this group (p = 0.0420). Lead-related complications were noted in 6 patients in the AAI group and 49 patients in the DDD group (p = 0.94). After 45 months, the risk of reoperation in the AAI group increased significantly due to a need for ventricular lead implantation.
Conclusions:
1. Atrial stimulation is safe in SSS but it may be associated with an increased risk of ventricular lead implantation if atrioventricular block or persistent AF with slow ventricular rate develops. 2. DDD and AAI groups did not differ significantly in terms of survival, development of persistent AF, and lead-related complications. 3. Tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome and the lack of antiarrhythmic treatment with beta-blocker and amiodarone increased the risk of persistent AF during long-term follow-up. 4. A higher rate of reoperations in patients with AAI systems, related mainly to development of persistent AF, especially after the fourth year of follow-up, may justify DDD system implantation in SSS.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Dysrhythmias IV: Characteristics of Bradyarrhythmias
ECG Interpretation of Arrhythmias I: Sinus Arrhythmias
Types of Arrhythmias
Sinus Node Arrhythmias
Sinus Bradycardia: Originating from the sinoatrial (SA) node, sinus bradycardia involves slower impulses, resulting in a heart rate of less than 60 beats per minute (bpm). Causes include sleep, vagal stimulation, beta-blockers, hypothyroidism,...
Dysrhythmias III: Characteristics of Dysrhythmias
Dysrhythmias VI: Management of Dysrhythmias
Pulse rhythm
Conversely, an irregular pulse pattern is termed dysrhythmia, stemming from disruptions in cardiac...
Disturbances in Heart Rhythm
Arrhythmias are categorized by their speed, rhythm, and origin. A slow heart...

