Beneficial effects of right ventricular non-apical vs. apical pacing: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials
Open Access
- 27 July 2011
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in EP Europace
- Vol. 14 (1), 81-91
- https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/eur240
Abstract
Previous studies have suggested that right ventricular apical (RVA) pacing may have deleterious effects on left ventricular function. Whether right ventricular non-apical (RVNA) pacing offers a better alternative to RVA pacing is unclear. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) in order to compare the mid- and long-term effects of RVA and RVNA pacing. We systematically searched the Cochrane library, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases for RCTs comparing RVA with RVNA pacing over >2 months follow-up. Data were pooled using random-effects models. Fourteen RCTs met our inclusion criteria involving 754 patients. Compared with subjects randomized to RVA pacing, those randomized to RVNA pacing had greater left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEF) at the end of follow-up [13 RCTs: weighted mean difference (WMD) 4.27%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15%, 7.40%]. RVNA had a better LVEF at the end of follow-up in RCTs with follow-up ≥12 months (WMD 7.53%, 95% CI 2.79%, 12.27%), those with <12 months of follow-up (WMD 1.95%, 95% CI 0.17%, 3.72%), and those conducted in patients with baseline LVEF ≤40–45% (WMD 3.71%, 95% CI 0.72%, 6.70%); no significant difference was observed in RCTs of patients whose baseline LVEF was preserved. Randomized-controlled trials provided inconclusive results with respect to exercise capacity, functional class, quality of life, and survival. While RCTs suggest that LVEF is higher with RVNA than with RVA pacing, there remains a need for large RCTs to compare the safety and efficacy of RVNA and RVA pacing.Keywords
This publication has 37 references indexed in Scilit:
- Pacing the Right Ventricular Septum: Time to Abandon Apical PacingPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2010
- Comparison of Effectiveness of Right Ventricular Septal Pacing Versus Right Ventricular Apical PacingThe American Journal of Cardiology, 2010
- Long‐Term Mechanical Consequences of Permanent Right Ventricular Pacing: Effect of Pacing SiteJournal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 2010
- Right Ventricular Septal Pacing-Can We See the Wood for the Trees?Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2009
- New‐Onset Heart Failure After Permanent Right Ventricular Apical Pacing in Patients with Acquired High‐Grade Atrioventricular Block and Normal Left Ventricular FunctionJournal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 2007
- Permanent pacing is a risk factor for the development of heart failureThe American Journal of Cardiology, 2005
- Detrimental Ventricular Remodeling in Patients With Congenital Complete Heart Block and Chronic Right Ventricular Apical PacingCirculation, 2004
- Adverse Effect of Ventricular Pacing on Heart Failure and Atrial Fibrillation Among Patients With Normal Baseline QRS Duration in a Clinical Trial of Pacemaker Therapy for Sinus Node DysfunctionCirculation, 2003
- Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?Controlled Clinical Trials, 1996
- Meta-analysis in clinical trialsControlled Clinical Trials, 1986