Bipolar atrial triggered pacing to restore normal chronotropic responsiveness in an orthotopic cardiac transplant patient

Optimal cardiac pacing after heart transplantation

The transplanted heart is characterized physiologically by autonomic denervation, chronotropic incompetence, intermittent episodes of allograft rejection, and frequently by diastolic dysfunction. Sinus node dysfunction resulting in bradycardia is common in the early postoperative period following standard orthotopic cardiac transplantation. Bradycardia tends to remit spontaneously but there are no factors that accurately identify patients who will need long-term pacing. Patients in whom bradycardia persists beyond the second postoperative week despite treatment with theophylline require permanent pacemaker implantation. It has been observed that chronotropic incompetence and diastolic dysfunction are important determinants of exercise capacity following heart transplantation. Pacing that restores chronotropic competence improves exercise capacity, confirming the importance of impaired heart rate response. As in other settings, pacing that preserves atrioventricular (AV) synchrony results in increased cardiac output. For these reasons when pacing is necessary we recommend the DDDR mode (AAIR if intact AV nodal conduction is present) so that the 30%-50% of patients who remain pacemaker-dependent long-term obtain maximal benefit from their transplant.

Exercise response of the recipient atrial remnant after orthotopic cardiac transplantation: implications for recipient atrial triggered pacing

The assumption that the recipient atrial remnant in the cardiac transplant recipient is normal has led to the suggestion that it is an appropriate trigger for permanent pacing in transplant recipients who need pacing or to restore chronotropic competence and/or mechanical synchrony of the composite atrium. We examined the chronotropic response to exercise in 12 orthotopic cardiac transplant recipients (mean age 49 years) at a mean time of 17 months posttransplantation. Recipient and donor atrial rates were noted and compared and chronotropic competence determined. Two of 12 recipient atrial remnants were in atrial fibrillation. Only six of the remaining 10 recipient atria exhibited chronotropic competence. Seven of 10 recipient atria had rates higher than that of the donor. Only four of ten recipient atria in sinus rhythm satisfied both criteria. Two of these had abnormally high atrial responses early into exercise. Of the remaining two, only one recipient atrial remnant demonstrated a > or = 20% increase in heart rate above that of the donor at peak exercise. Hence only 1 of 12 (8.3%) transplant recipients potentially could benefit from recipient atrial triggered pacing. While recipient atrial triggered pacing is an attractive theoretical concept for restoring chronotropic competence following orthotopic cardiac transplantation, it may rarely be practical because the recipient atrial remnant displays rhythm abnormalities, chronotropic incompetence, and abnormalities in its exercise response.

Permanent atrial pacing in cardiac transplant patients

Thirteen out of 223 consecutive cardiac transplant patients required permanent pacemaker implantation; 11 for sinus node dysfunction and 2 for complete AV block. Patients with sinus node dysfunction were considered for AAIR mode pacemakers if they had intact AV conduction defined as a Wenckebach point of > 120 beats/min. Ten of 11 patients with sinus node dysfunction had a single atrial lead placed. Atrial lead placement was most easily accomplished with a straight, active fixation lead and the use of manually curved stylets to find an optimal position in the donor atrium, although active fixation leads with a preformed atrial J were used as well. Two leads dislodged requiring revision. In contrast, only 1 of 250 atrial leads implanted in nontransplanted hearts dislodged (P < 0.0001). Transvenous endomyocardial biopsies have not caused atrial lead dislodgment. Most transplant recipients requiring permanent pacing have intact AV nodal function and require only atrial pacing. Atrial lead dislodgment requiring lead revision occurs more frequently in heart transplant recipients than in native hearts. Use of a straight active fixation lead with a manually formed curve in the stylet is useful in order to find the optimal position for pacing.

VDD pacing with single lead in a heart transplant recipient: case report

Permanent pacemaker implantation is required in a large number of transplantation patients principally because of sinus node dysfunction of the donor atrium. The most suitable mode of pacing in these cases is still subject to controversy. We describe one case of a single lead system of VDD stimulation and sensing of the recipient atrial signal in a 32-year-old patient with posttransplant symptomatic sinus node dysfunction. Physiological adaptation of rate was achieved with recovery of normal receptor sinus node function.

Electrocardiographic and electrophysiologic properties of cardiac allografts

The increasing number of heart transplant patients requires that physicians be able to recognize the electrocardiographic (ECG) and electrophysiologic properties of cardiac allografts. Cardiac allografts are characterized by modifications of resting ECGs and frequent arrhythmias in the postoperative period, and the loss of autonomic nervous control illustrated by permanent tachycardia and loss of heart rate variability during 24-hour ambulatory ECG recording. Some clinical and experimental observations suggest a mid-term reinnervation of the cardiac allograft, but this requires histologic confirmation. The electrophysiologic characteristics of the denervated myocardium are similar to those of the innervated myocardium at rest. However, supersensitivity to circulating catecholamines has been observed in cardiac allografts as in experimentally denervated hearts, which is responsible for a progressive increase in heart rate during exercise and a slow decrease during recovery. Supersensitivity of the denervated heart to acetylcholine may explain the high prevalence of donor sinus dysfunction due to impairment of its automaticity. More often, the sinus node dysfunction is transient and can be treated with an adenosine antagonist, such as theophylline, before permanent implantation of a pacemaker. In the case of pacemaker implantation, synchronization of the donor atria with the recipient atria is desirable, and an endocardial lead implantation is preferred. Several electrophysiologic changes have been observed during acute cardiac allograft rejection. From experimental studies, the most important of these are the disturbance of conduction in the atria and the atrioventricular node and a decrease in the amplitude of the ventricular potential. Initial studies on isolated myocytes show profound changes in membrane conductance during experimental cardiac rejection. The development of new noninvasive detection methods of cardiac allograft rejection, such as intramyocardial voltage electrogram monitoring and high-resolution ECG, could help early diagnosis.

Atrioatrial conduction after orthotopic heart transplantation

OBJECTIVES

In two patients with orthotopic heart transplantation, the surface electrocardiogram suggested interaction between the donor right atrium and the recipient right atrium. An electrophysiologic investigation was performed to assess possible atrioatrial conduction.

BACKGROUND

After orthotopic heart transplantation, both recipient and donor atrial activities are usually independent, but in humans they may synchronize for short periods during exercise.

METHODS

Electrophysiologic recordings were made using standard techniques. The atrial electrode locations (anterior for the donor and posterior for the recipient right atria) were confirmed by fluoroscopy. Incremental and programmed donor and recipient right atrial pacing protocols were performed.

RESULTS

Unidirectional conduction between native and graft atria occurred in both patients. This phenomenon was evident at rest, during normal sinus rhythm and at various pacing rates, resulting in frequent atrial bigeminy and trigeminy.

CONCLUSIONS

Possible atrioatrial conduction after orthotopic heart transplantation may potentially be arrhythmogenic for the chamber where extrasystoles occur. This should be taken into account in attempting to devise new pacing modes if both atria are rendered electrically common.

Long-term results of pacemaker therapy after orthotopic heart transplantation

The objectives of this study were to identify: (1) the indications for pacemaker implantation; (2) the long-term survival; (3) the percentage of bradyarrhythmias below 50 beats/min persisting for more than 3 months; and (4) the variables predicting persistent bradyarrhythmias following orthotopic heart transplantations. During the recent decade (August 1, 1981 through December 31, 1991), 237 patients underwent orthotopic heart transplantation at our institution. Twenty-six recipients (11%) showed evidence of a symptomatic bradyarrhythmia due to sinus node dysfunction (n = 25) or complete heart block (n = 1), which required insertion of a permanent pacing device. During a mean follow-up period of 17.2 months (range 3 to 57 months), five patients (19%) died and one was lost to follow-up. Actuarial survival at 1 and 4 years were 81% and 65%, respectively, as compared to 79% and 69%, respectively, in patients without permanent pacemakers. Holter monitoring after 3 months (n = 25) and 1 year (n = 14) showed a spontaneous heart rate below 50 beats/min in six (24%) and three patients (18%), respectively. None of the tested variables predicted the necessity of initial pacemaker implantation. However, in patients requiring permanent pacing for a period longer than 3 months, ischemic time of the donor heart was found to be significantly longer as compared to the other patients (221 +/- 76 min vs 137 +/- 91 min, p < 0.05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)