Chronic Apical and Nonapical Right Ventricular Pacing in Patients with High-Grade Atrioventricular Block: Results of the Right Pace Study

Abstract EN

Objective.

The aim of the study was to compare the two approaches to chronic right ventricular pacing currently adopted in clinical practice: right ventricular apical (RVA) and non-RVA pacing.

Background.

Chronic RVA pacing is associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation, morbidity, and even mortality.

Non-RVA pacing may yield more physiologic ventricular activation and provide potential long-term benefits and has recently been adopted as standard procedure at many implanting centers.

Methods.

The Right Pace study was a multicenter, prospective, single-blind, nonrandomized trial involving 437 patients indicated for dual-chamber pacemaker implantation with a high percentage of RV pacing.

Results.

RV lead-tip target location was the apex or the interventricular septum.

RVA (274) and non-RVA patients (163) did not differ in baseline characteristics.

During a median follow-up of 19 months (25th–75th percentiles, 13–25), 17 patients died.

The rates of the primary outcome of death due to any cause or hospitalization for heart failure were comparable between the groups (log-rank test, p=0.609), as were the rates of the composite of death due to any cause, hospitalization for heart failure, or an increase in left ventricular end-systolic volume ≥ 15% as compared with the baseline evaluation (secondary outcome, p=0.703).

After central adjudication of X-rays, comparison between adjudicated RVA (239 patients) and non-RVA (170 patients) confirmed the absence of difference in the rates of primary (p=0.402) and secondary (p=0.941) outcome.

Conclusions.

In patients with indications for dual-chamber pacemaker who require a high percentage of ventricular stimulation, RVA or non-RVA pacing resulted in comparable outcomes.

This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT01647490).