Toby Markowitz

Timing Markers Showing Pacemaker Behavior to Aid in the Follow‐Up of a Physiological Pacemaker

In the present study a multiprogrammable, atriul synchronous, ventricular inhibited pacemaker (Enertrax) was used in six patients. This pacer makes it possible to evaluate pacemaker performance nonmvasively and facilitates the correct interprefation of the djfficult ECGs produced by these complex pacemakers.

AN ALGORITHM FOR AUTOMATIC MEASUREMENT OF STIMULATION THRESHOLDS : CLINICAL PERFORMANCE AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS

We have developed an algorithmic method for automatic determination of stimulation thresholds in both cardiac chambers in patients with intact atrioventricular (AV) conduction. The algorithm utilizes ventricular sensing, may be used with any type of pacing leads, and may be downloaded via telemetry links into already implanted dual‐chamber Thera® pacemakers. Thresholds are determined with 0.5 V amplitude and 0.06 ms pulse‐width resolution in unipolar, bipolar, or both lead configurations, with a programmable sampling interval from 2 minutes to 48 hours. Measured values are stored in the pacemaker memory for later retrieval and do not influence permanent output settings. The algorithm was intended to gather information on continuous behavior of stimulation thresholds, which is important in the formation of strategies for programming pacemaker outputs. Clinical performance of the algorithm was evaluated in eight patients who received bipolar tined steroid‐eluting leads and were observed for a mean of 5.1 months. Patient safety was not compromised by the algorithm, except for the possibility of pacing during the physiologic refractory period. Methods for discrimination of incorrect data points were developed and incorrect values were discarded. Fine resolution threshold measurements collected during this study indicated that: (1) there were great differences in magnitude of threshold peaking in different patients; (2) the initial intensive threshold peaking was usually followed by another less intensive but longer‐lasting wave of threshold peaking; (3) the pattern of tissue reaction in the atrium appeared different from that in the ventricle; and (4) threshold peaking in the bipolar lead configuration was greater than in the unipolar configuration. The algorithm proved to be useful in studying ambulatory thresholds.

Rate Augmentation and Atrial Arrhythmias in DDDR Pacing

SPENCER, W.H., ET AL.: Rate Augmentation and Atrial Arrhythmias in DDDR Pacing. Dual chamber, rate‐modulated pacemakers provide the capability of augmenting the heart rate of patients with chronotropic incompetence but also may cause atrial arrhythmias because of high rate, competitive atrial pacing. We studied ten patients with two consecutive 24‐hour Holter monitors during which they were alternately programmed to either DDD or DDDR pacing in random order. Maximum heart rates (max HR) were measured at every 15‐minute interval during each 24‐hour period. DDDR pacing showed rate augmentation, 80 ± 7 average max HR when compared with DDD pacing, average max HR 76 ± 5. These results were even more striking when waking hours (7 am to 10 pm) were compared: average max HR 86 ± 7 DDDR versus 78 ± 4 average max HR DDD. Several patients showed marked rate augmentation. Seven of ten patients preferred DDDR pacing over DDD pacing. In the entire population, DDDR pacing did not result in an increased number of atrial arrhythmias (1.25 atrial events 124 hour) when compared to DDD pacing (1.75 atrial events/ 24 hour). We conclude that DDDR pacing provides heart rate augmentation during daily life in a clinical population while not resulting in a significant increase in atrial arrhythmias. (PACE, Vol. 13, December, Part 11, 1990)