copy and paste this google map to your website or blog!
Press copy button and paste into your blog or website.
(Please switch to 'HTML' mode when posting into your blog. Examples: WordPress Example, Blogger Example)
Right Ventricular Pacing - AHA ASA Journals Patients with the highest percentage of RV pacing (98%–100%) had an incidence of appropriate shocks that was approximately half that seen in patients with virtually no ventricular pacing
How harmful is right ventricular pacing? The question revived by the . . . The BioPace randomized controlled trial tested whether cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular pacing was superior to right ventricular (RV) pacing (predominantly apical) in patients with atrioventricular (AV) block expected to receive a high burden of ventricular pacing
Reduction of RV pacing by continuous optimization of the AV interval This prospective, multicenter study compared the percentage of ventricular pacing with and without AV interval extension Methods: Among 197 patients enrolled in the study, the percentage of ventricular-paced beats was evaluated via device diagnostics at the 1-month follow-up
Optimizing Patient Selection for Physiological Pacing in . . . The aim of our study was to identify factors which may be associated with an increased RV pacing burden > 20% in those who have a device inserted for a bradyarrhythmia indication, to effectively guide first-line pacing strategy selection
Minimizing Unnecessary Right Ventricular Pacing | USC Journal The result was an increased incidence of the composite end-point of hospitalization for CHF and death in patients programmed to DDDR mode, compared with those programmed to VVI mode with ventricular pacing at a low rate, and consequently no pacing at all in most patients (1% overall)