Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 1, 2026
Benefits of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in an Asynchronous Heart Failure Model Induced by Left Bundle Branch Ablation and Rapid Pacing
Published on: December 11, 2017
A comparison of VVIR and DDDR pacing following cardiac transplantation
M Roelke1, D McNamara, S Osswald
1Cardiac Unit, Massachusettes General Hospital, Boston 02114.
Unlabelled:
We compared the clinical course of patients paced in VVIR versus DDDR mode to determine the most appropriate method of pacing following cardiac transplantation. Pacemaker implantation was required in 9 of 90 orthotopic cardiac transplants (10%). Indications included sinus bradycardia or sinus arrest (8 patients) and AV node dysfunction (1 patient). VVIR pacemakers were implanted in four patients and DDDR in five patients. DDDR patients: The mean P wave was 1.7 mV and the mean atrial stimulation threshold was 0.8 V (at 0.5 msec). During follow-up of 20 months, two atrial lead complications developed (29% of leads in 33% of patients). No lead complications were directly related to endomyocardial biopsy. VVIR patients: All four patients developed VA conduction with mean VA time 180 msec (160-240 msec). Two patients developed pacemaker syndrome.
Conclusions:
VA conduction and pacemaker syndrome may develop in cardiac transplant recipients paced in the VVIR mode. Dual chamber pacing is technically feasible and preferable following cardiac transplantation.
