Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

S Saksena

Publications and source records attributed to S Saksena.

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
PubMed1998

Design and implementation of the Dual Site Atrial Pacing to Prevent Atrial Fibrillation (DAPPAF) clinical trial. DAPPAF Phase 1 Investigators.

The Dual Site Atrial Pacing to Prevent Atrial Fibrillation (DAPPAF) study compares dual site, single site and support pacing modalities in the prevention of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with a history of paroxysmal AF (PAF) and a bradyarrhythmic indication for pacing. The trial is a randomized crossover comparison of dual site atrial pacing, single site atrial pacing, and a support pacing control period (DDI at 50 ppm or VDI) done in six month intervals. Patient inclusion requires at least 2 documented AF episodes in the three months prior to enrollment. The patients can be on concurrent antiarrhythmic drug regimens but this regimen must remain constant throughout the protocol. Patients with AV nodal ablation are excluded from this study. The primary endpoints of the study compare the time to first recurrence of clinically significant symptomatic AF with ECG verification, and quality of life among the three treatment modes. Secondary endpoints include time to first recurrence of all AF episodes as monitored by the pacemaker, the measurement of echocardiographic parameters, and symptoms logged by the patients. This trial was designed after pilot studies showed dual site pacing to be safe, feasible and preliminary results suggested increased maintenance of sinus rhythm with atrial pacing.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Multisite electrode pacing for prevention of atrial fibrillation.

There is increasing evidence that single site atrial pacing is beneficial for atrial fibrillation (AF) prevention in sick sinus syndrome. Multisite atrial pacing methods such as dual site right atrial pacing and biatrial synchronous pacing are currently under active evaluation for AF and atrial flutter prevention in patients with or without bradyarrhythmias. Clinical studies have demonstrated that multisite atrial pacing has an incremental benefit as compared with single site right and left atrial pacing. The electrophysiologic rationale for the efficacy of multisite atrial pacing is based on the reduction of global and local atrial activation times during pacing and for closely coupled atrial premature beats. This results in earlier recovery of excitability and decreased conduction delay. Dual site right atrial pacing consisting of simultaneous pacing from the high right atrium and the coronary sinus ostium reduces the activation times in virtually all left and right atrial regions, especially in areas of conduction delay. Multisite pacing methods reduce the ability to initiate AF with atrial premature beats by reducing the window for AF induction and minimizing the dispersion of atrial refractoriness. In our long-term clinical experience including 30 patients with paroxysmal and chronic drug-refractory AF, 78% of the patients were free of AF recurrence at 1 year, 63% at 2 years, and 56% at 3 years. Rhythm control was achieved in 86% of patients during a follow-up period of 3 years. Concomitantly, we observed a marked reduction in need for anticoagulation, type I antiarrhythmic drugs, and cardioversion therapies. There were no coronary sinus lead-related complications during follow-up. After the initial favorable clinical experiences, two major prospective randomized trials (DAPPAF and SYNBIAPACE) are under way in North America and Europe to evaluate quantitatively the beneficial impact of multisite atrial pacing for AF prevention.

Atrial Fibrillation↗
PubMed1997

Risk stratification and clinical outcome of minimally symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with nonsustained ventricular tachycardia and coronary disease: a prospective single-center study.

The Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial (MADIT) showed improved survival with defibrillator therapy but was restricted to coronary artery disease patients with nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) and inducible nonsupressible VT. The outcome of patients without inducible VT or inducible but suppressed VT still remains unclear. We performed risk stratification at electrophysiologic (EP) study in 111 consecutive unselected patients with nonsustained VT and coronary artery disease and randomized them to drug or device therapy. Follow-up on selected therapy was 1-71 (mean 27 +/- 20) months. Of 111 patients, 39 patients (35%) had inducible sustained VT at baseline EP study and were stratified to a "higher" risk group (group 1) for sudden death. In 9 of these patients (group 1A), sustained VT was suppressed with class IA antiarrhythmic drugs; in the remaining 30 patients (group 1B) sustained VT was not suppressed with class IA antiarrhythmic drugs. The other 72 of 111 patients (65%) had no inducible sustained VT at EP study and were stratified to a "lower"-risk group (group 2) for sudden death. Mean LVEF in group 1 was 30 +/- 10% versus 37 +/- 9% in group 2 (p = 0.001). Selected therapy in group 1 was an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (16 patients) or guided drug therapy (electrophysiologically guided class I antiarrhythmic drugs = 7 patients; Holter-guided class III antiarrhythmic drugs = 16 patients). In group 2, empiric drug therapy included beta blockers in 29 patients or Holter-guided class III antiarrhythmic drugs in 17 patients, with no antiarrhythmic drug therapy being administered in 26 patients. Mean LVEF tended to be lower in patients receiving class III antiarrhythmic drug therapy (34 +/- 12%) than in patients receiving beta blockers (40 +/- 10%, p = 0.06). Three-year total survival was comparable in group 1 (70%) and in group 2 (81%), but sudden cardiac death mortality tended to be lower in group 1 versus group 2 (0 vs 9%, p = 0.09). Patients receiving class III antiarrhythmic therapy had significantly higher 3-year all cause (40%, p = 0.04) and sudden death (25%, p = 0.06) mortality than patients receiving beta blockers (17% and 8% respectively) or no antiarrhythmic drug therapy (4% and 0%, respectively). The following conclusions can be drawn from this analysis: (1) Electrophysiologically guided drug therapy and implantable defibrillators can minimize the risk of sudden cardiac death in patients with coronary artery disease and inducible sustained VT stratified to higher risk of sudden death. A comparable outcome with respect to sudden death prevention in drug-suppressed or drug-refractory patients suggests limited prognostic benefit of class IA drug testing. (2) Lower-risk patients with severely depressed LVEF and minimal or no symptoms do not have a favorable outcome with respect to sudden and all-cause mortality on Holter-guided class III drug therapy. However, asymptomatic patients with mildly depressed left ventricular function have low sudden death event rates on beta blocker or no antiarrhythmic drug therapy.

Aged↗
PubMed1997

Clinical and socioeconomic profile of patients with malignant ventricular arrhythmias in 1993 to 1995. AVID investigators. Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillator.

This report summarizes the clinical and socioeconomic characteristics of the first 542 patients entered into the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillator (AVID) trial. AVID is a multicenter trial comparing a strategy of initial implantable cardioverter-defibrillator placement to initial antiarrhythmic drug therapy in preventing death in patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest who were not taking amiodarone and who did not have an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in place at the time of the index event. These patients were randomly assigned to immediate defibrillator placement or to "best" medical therapy. Clinical and socioeconomic histories were collected by interview using standard terms developed for the study. Patients without (group 1) and with (group 2) a history of prior cardiac arrest were compared. The mean age of the 542 patients was 65 +/- 10 years, most were men, white, had coronary disease, and were highly functional despite the fact that only a minority were employed. Almost all had some form of health insurance. At the time of the index event, few were taking any therapy to prevent cardiac arrest, even in the group of patients with a history of previous cardiac arrest. Thus, the clinical and socioeconomic profile of patients resuscitated from sudden cardiac death entered into the AVID study is generally as expected. There is a striking absence of any attempt at chronic therapy to prevent cardiac arrest in most patients with a prior ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation.

Aged↗
PubMed1997

Low-energy endocardial defibrillation using dual, triple, and quadruple electrode systems.

The feasibility of achieving both universal application of nonthoracotomy leads and low (< or = 15 J) defibrillation energy requirements by optimizing lead system configuration for use with low-output (<30 J) biphasic shock pulse generators was examined. Sixteen patients (mean age 62 +/- 8 years and mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 38 +/- 15%) were included in the study. All patients had either experienced syncope with induced ventricular tachycardia (n = 4) or had documented sustained ventricular tachycardia (n = 7) or ventricular fibrillation (n = 5). Defibrillation threshold testing was performed in 2 stages on different days in these patients. In the first stage, 2 defibrillation catheter electrodes were positioned in the right ventricle and superior vena cava with an axillary cutaneous patch. Fifteen-joule, 10- and 5-J biphasic shocks were delivered across 3 different electrode configurations-right ventricle to superior vena cava, right ventricle to axillary patch, right ventricle to a combination of superior vena cava and axillary patch. In the second stage, an 80-ml can electrode was added subcutaneously in a pectoral location to the previous leads. Configurations compared were the right ventricle to pectoral can, and right ventricle to an "array"-combining superior vena cava, can, and axillary patch leads. The defibrillation threshold was determined using a step-down method. In stage 1, mean defibrillation threshold for the right ventricle to axillary patch (12.7 +/- 5.9 J) and right ventricle to superior vena cava plus axillary patch (9.8 +/- 5.2 J) configurations was lower than the right ventricle to superior vena cava configuration (14.2 +/- 6.4 J, p <0.05). In stage 2, the defibrillation was higher for the right ventricle to pectoral can (9.2 +/- 5.1 J) configuration compared with the right ventricle to the array (5.6 +/- 3.6 J, p < or =0.05). The right ventricle to array had the lowest defibrillation threshold, whereas the right ventricle to pectoral can was the best dual electrode system. Low-energy endocardial defibrillation (< or =10 J) was feasible in 72% of tested patients with > 1 electrode configuration at 10 J, whereas only 53% of successful patients could be reverted at >1 electrode configuration at 5 J (p <0.05). Reduction in maximum pulse generator output to < or =25 J using these electrode configurations with bidirectional shocks is feasible and maintains an adequate safety margin.

Aged↗
PubMed1997

Right and left ventricular hemodynamic performance during sustained ventricular tachycardia.

Several factors may influence hemodynamic tolerance of a ventricular tachycardia (VT) episode but, to date, only VT rate has been used as a major detection criterion in selecting implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy algorithms. We examined hemodynamic changes during VT in humans and a possible correlation between left and right ventricular hemodynamic indexes. Right ventricular hemodynamic indexes could reflect systemic hemodynamics but previous studies have been inconclusive. Patients with coronary artery disease and a history of recurrent, sustained VT were studied. Aortic pressure and right and left ventricular pressures were simultaneously recorded with 2 dual micromanometer-tipped high-fidelity pressure catheters during sinus rhythm and during induced sustained monomorphic VT. Beat-to-beat analysis was performed using custom-made software. Nine patients (7 men, mean age 60 +/- 8 years, mean ejection fraction 24 +/- 8%) with 11 VT episodes (mean cycle length 283 +/- 48 ms) were studied. During VT, left and right ventricular systolic pressures showed a mean decrease of 57% and 26%, respectively, with weak correlation (r = 0.67, p = 0.06) between both values. There was also an increase in mean left and right ventricular end-diastolic pressures of 26% and 74%, respectively, and no correlation was seen (r = -0.2, p = 0.6). A significant correlation was found between changes in left and right ventricular maximal positive dP/dt (55% and 28% decrease, respectively (r = 0.69, p = 0.03) and between changes in left and right ventricular maximal negative dP/dt (64% vs 39% decrease, r = 0.71, p = 0.02). Most ventricular time parameters in both ventricles differed significantly during VT compared with sinus rhythm; however, only the decrease in right ventricular time to end-diastolic pressure correlated with the decrease in left ventricular systolic pressure, at the 10th VT beat (r = 0.8, p = 0.01). We conclude that left and right ventricles are hemodynamically unequally affected during rapid VT. Although right ventricular pressures cannot be reliably used to assess changes in the hemodynamic status of the left ventricle, additional parameters, such as dP/dt or changes in ventricular time intervals, should be further evaluated for inclusion in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator algorithms.

Aged↗
PubMed1997

Acute effects of dual-site right atrial pacing in patients with spontaneous and inducible atrial flutter and fibrillation.

OBJECTIVES: We tested the ability of dual-site right atrial pacing to prevent atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter induced by single-site atrial pacing and correlated its efficacy with clinical patient characteristics, atrial activation times and refractory periods. BACKGROUND: Prevention of recurrent AF with long-term dual-site right atrial pacing has been demonstrated in our previous studies. However, the mechanism of antiarrhythmic benefit is unclear. METHODS: Using standard electrophysiologic methods, baseline electrocardiographic and electrophysiologic measurements (mean +/- SD) were obtained. Programmed atrial stimulation was performed for AF or atrial flutter induction. Atrial pacing was performed at two drive cycle lengths (600 and 400 ms) and followed by one to three atrial extrastimuli at one to four pacing sites in the right atrium. In patients with inducible AF or atrial flutter, reinduction was then attempted during a dual-site atrial pacing drive train. This was achieved by simultaneously pacing at the high right atrium and coronary sinus ostium at an identical rate to the baseline stimulation, with the atrial extrastimuli being delivered at the pacing site responsible for the initial AF episode initiation. RESULTS: Twenty patients (10 men, 10 women, mean [+/- SD] age 64 +/- 16 years) with symptomatic AF (n = 10) or atrial flutter (n = 10) were studied. There was a significant abbreviation of the P wave duration to 103 +/- 17 ms with dual-site pacing compared with sinus rhythm (120 +/- 12 ms, p = 0.005) and high right atrial pacing (121 +/- 17 ms, p = 0.005). This was also associated with a characteristic change in P wave configuration with an inferior and leftward axis shift. The effective refractory period at the high right atrium remained unchanged with dual-site atrial pacing compared with single-site high right atrial pacing. Sixteen patients had inducible AF or atrial flutter and could be tested after dual-site atrial pacing. The induced atrial tachyarrhythmia was suppressed in nine patients (56%), who had either induced AF (n = 5) or atrial flutter (n = 4). The difference in the effective refractory period between the high right atrium and the coronary sinus ostium pacing sites was significantly greater (33 +/- 12 ms) in patients with suppression of atrial tachyarrhythmia with dual-site atrial pacing compared with patients without suppression (15 +/- 13 ms, p = 0.001). P wave abbreviation did not correlate with arrhythmia suppression. There was no correlation between suppression of inducible AF or atrial flutter and demographic or clinical patient characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Dual-site right atrial pacing from the high right atrium and coronary sinus ostium can suppress inducible AF or atrial flutter elicited after single-site high right atrial pacing in selected patients. Acute suppression is more likely in patients with greater dispersion of right atrial refractoriness between these two sites.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Evaluation of a programming algorithm for the third tachycardia zone in a fourth-generation implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

The clinical efficacy of electrical algorithms for termination of slow ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) in implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) is well established. Such algorithms have not been equally well defined for fast VT reversion. We report the testing of a prospectively designed algorithm for ICDs to treat fast VT that is inherently less responsive to antitachycardia pacing than slow VT. Fourth-generation ICD devices were programmed to three prospectively defined tachycardia detection zones as follows: cycle lengths < or = 260 ms for VF, 270-330 ms for fast VT, and > 330 ms for slow VT. The initial selected therapy for the VF zone was a high-energy biphasic shock (> 15 J), while a 3- or 5-J biphasic shock was usually administered for fast VT, and antitachycardia pacing was initially attempted for slow VT. Initial therapy was followed by backup therapy with high-energy shocks. Twenty-eight patients, 24 of whom were males, all with organic heart disease, with a mean age of 65 +/- 9 years, received either a Medtronic 7219D (23 patients), 7219C (2 patients), 7218SP1 (2 patients), or 7218C (1 patient) ICD with a nonthoracotomy lead system. The defibrillation threshold was 10 +/- 5 J. At predischarge electrophysiologic testing, a single 3- or 5-J shock terminated all episodes of fast VT tested. During a follow-up of 18 +/- 9 months, there were four nonarrhythmic deaths. Fourteen patients (50%) had a total of 21 VF, 44 fast VT, and 202 slow VT episodes. Twenty-three of 24 (96%) VF, 33 of 39 (84%) fast VT, and 193 of 202 (95.5%) slow VT episodes were terminated with the first delivered therapy in each therapy algorithm (p = NS). The overall efficacy of the entire electrical therapy algorithm was 100% for VF, 100% for fast VT, and 98% for slow VT episodes (p = NS). No patient experienced syncope or presyncope during fast VT or VF in this study. We conclude that a third detection and therapy zone can be successfully programmed in ICDs to define a range of fast VT episodes that can be effectively terminated with lower energy cardioversion shocks with comparable success and freedom from arrhythmic symptoms to electrical therapies used for slow VT and VF.

Aged↗
PubMed1997

Effects of high-frequency atrial pacing in atypical atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation.

Atypical atrial flutter has, hitherto, been relatively refractory to termination by rapid atrial pacing. High-frequency pacing (HFP) in the atrium, for termination of atrial flutter or atrial fibrillation (AF), and the electrophysiologic effects related to it have not been examined. We examined the clinical efficacy, safety, and electrophysiologic mechanisms of HFP using 50-Hz bursts at 10 mA applied at the high right atrium in patients with atypical atrial flutter (group 1) or AF (group 2), using a prospective randomized study protocol. Four burst durations (500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 ms) were applied at the high right atrium repetitively in random sequence in 22 patients with spontaneous atrial flutter or AF. Local and distant right and left atrial electrogram recordings were analyzed during and after HFP. HFP resulted in local and distant right and left atrial electrogram acceleration in 8 of 10 patients (80%) in group 1 but caused less frequent local atrial electrogram acceleration (6 of 12 patients) and no distant atrial electrogram effects in group 2 (p < .05 versus group 1). The HFP protocol was effective in arrhythmia termination in 6 of 10 patients in group 1 but in no patient in group 2 (p < .05 versus group 1). Standard HFP protocol applied at the high right atrium can frequently alter atrial activation in both atria and can terminate atypical atrial flutter. Efficacy in AF is limited, probably due to limited electrophysiologic actions beyond the local pacing site.

Adult↗