Published online Nov 26, 2024. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v16.i11.644
Revised: August 24, 2024
Accepted: September 6, 2024
Published online: November 26, 2024
Processing time: 199 Days and 1.4 Hours
Permanent pacemaker implantation has the potential to impact left ventricular (LV) function and hence quality of life (QoL) in the long term.
To assess the effect of single- and dual-chamber pacing on LV function and QoL.
This study included 56 patients who underwent permanent pacing: Dual pacing, dual sensing, dual responsive and rate responsive (DDDR) for the initial 3 months and ventricular pacing, ventricular sensing, inhibited response and rate responsive (VVIR) for the next 3 months, and DDDR mode for the last 3 months. Throughout the study period, various echocardiographic parameters, functional status, and QoL were measured to assess the impact of pacing on LV function compared with baseline and at every 3 months interval.
A significant change appeared in cardiac function after VVIR pacing which included diastolic properties of LV as shown by increase in isovolumic relaxation time from (85.28 ± 9.54 ms) to (89.53 ± 9.65 ms). At the 3-, 6-, and 9-month follow-up, reduction in LV ejection fraction was observed to be 62.71 ± 4.66%, 61.07 ± 4.41%, and 58.48 ± 3.89%, respectively. An increase in the QoL scores was noted at every follow-up visit.
An apparent depressant effect on LV function due to right ventricular pacing, with a higher incidence of adverse outcomes in the VVIR mode. In addition, an upsurge in QoL scores for the study population was noted, which indicates improvement in the QoL of patients post-pacing, irrespective of the mode. Generally, the DDDR mode is a highly preferable pacing mode.
Core Tip: Pacemaker implantation is a common treatment for cardiac conduction disorders, but the impact of right ventricular pacing (RVP) on left ventricular (LV) function remains a concern. Limited information is available on the acute and early effects of RVP on LV function, particularly when comparing dual pacing, dual sensing, dual responsive and rate responsive (DDDR) with ventricular pacing, ventricular sensing, inhibited response and rate responsive (VVIR) pacemakers. This study found that RVP adversely affects LV function, with more significant impairment observed in VVIR mode compared to DDDR mode. However, both modes led to improvements in quality of life (QoL). The findings support the use of DDDR mode over VVIR mode for better clinical outcomes and preservation of LV function, while also improving QoL.