Chest ACCP Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jutzy, R. V.
Right arrow Articles by Levine, P. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jutzy, R. V.
Right arrow Articles by Levine, P. A.

Chest, Vol 105, 83-86, Copyright © 1994 by American College of Chest Physicians

ARTICLES

Comparison of cardiac pacing modes in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

RV Jutzy, L Houston-Feenstra and PA Levine
Department of Medicine, Loma Linda University Medical Center, CA 92354.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study compares the relative benefits of dual chamber adaptive rate pacing (DDDR) with ventricular adaptive rate pacing (VVIR) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). STUDY DESIGN: Cardiac hemodynamics were evaluated with serial exercise tests. A minimum of 2 h was allowed between studies. Pulmonary gas exchange was measured and cardiac output (CO) was determined at rest and immediately after maximum exercise by Doppler echocardiography. PATIENTS: Sixteen patients with DDDR pacemakers were studied. Eight patients had COPD and eight patients had normal lung function (NLF). Baseline lung function was documented with spirometry. INTERVENTIONS: The patients with NLF functioned as a control group. Prior to entry into the study, the rate-modulated parameters of the pacemaker were programmed to a clinically determined optimal set of parameters for each individual patient. These were not changed for the duration of the study. RESULTS: Both groups showed a statistically significant improvement in exercise duration, CO at maximum exercise, and cardiac output difference (CODiff) with the dual chamber adaptive rate pacing mode (DDDR). (COdiff is the change in CO from rest to maximum exercise.) Patients with NLF also showed a significant improvement in anaerobic threshold (AT) and VCO2 max with DDDR. Patients with lung disease showed a statistically significant improvement at all levels of exercise in the ventilatory equivalent for oxygen. CONCLUSION: In this study, those patients with chronic lung disease who required cardiac pacing performed significantly better in the DDDR mode as compared with the VVIR mode. Therefore, the DDDR pacing mode should provide an improved quality of life for the patient with COPD who also requires cardiac pacing.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1994 by the American College of Chest Physicians.