Premium
Effect of Steroid Eluting Versus Conventional Electrodes on Propafenone Induced Rise in Chronic Ventricular Pacing Threshold
Author(s) -
CORNACCHIA DANIELE,
FABBRI MAURO,
MARESTA ALEARDO,
NIGRO PASQUALE,
SORRENTINO FRANCESCO,
PUGLISI ANDREA,
RICCI RENATO,
PERALDO CARLO,
FAZZARI MASSIMO,
PISTIS GIANFRANCO,
SESTU PIERO,
MEREU DIONIGI,
SETA FRANCESCO
Publication year - 1993
Publication title -
pacing and clinical electrophysiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.686
H-Index - 101
eISSN - 1540-8159
pISSN - 0147-8389
DOI - 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1993.tb02334.x
Subject(s) - propafenone , medicine , sick sinus syndrome , cardiology , anesthesia , atrial fibrillation
The aim of this study was to evaluate chronic ventricular pacing threshold increase after oral propafenone therapy. Eighty‐three patients affected by advanced atrioventricular hJock and sick sinus syndrome were studied at least 3 months after pacemaker implantation, before and after oral propafenone therapy (450–900 mg/day based on body weight). The patients were subdivided into three groups according to the type of unipolar electrode that was implanted: group I (41 patients)Medtronic CapSure 4003, group II(30 patients)Medtronic Target Tip 4011, and group III (12 patients)Osypka Vy screw‐in lead. In all cases a Medtronic unipolar pacemaker was implanted: 30 Minix, 23 Activitrax, 14 Elite, 12 Legend, and 4 Pasys. Propafenone biood level was measured in 75 patients 3–5 hours after propafenone administration. The pacing autothreshoid was measured at 0.8 V, 1.6 V, and 2.5 V by reducing puise width. At the three different outputs before and after propafenone, threshold increments were significantly lower in group I in comparison with group II and group III (propafenone ranging from < 0.001 to < 0.05). No significant difference was found in pacing impedance or in propafenone plasma concentration in the three groups. Strength‐duration curves were drawn for each group at baseline and after propafenone administration. Before propafenone, in group I, the knee was markedly shifted to the left and downward as compared to the classic curve, so that the steep part was predominant; in group II and group III this shift was progressively less evident. After propafenone we found the curve shifted to the right with the flat part progressively more evident in group II and group III as compared to group I. We conclude that steroid eiuting leads cause less threshold increase than conventionol and screw‐in ones after oral propafenone, thus leading to safer chronic pacing. Chronic pacing at 2.5‐V amplitude and 0.6‐msec width was feasible in 97% of group I patients and in 80% of group II patients, but not in group III due to an insufficient safety margin. propafenone, pacing threshold