A prospective randomized comparison of autodecremental pacing to burst pacing in device therapy for chronic ventricular tachycardia secondary to coronary artery disease

Abstract

A number of modes of antitachycardia pacing therapies are available in the newer generations of implantable cardioverter/defibrillators. The efficacy of synchronized burst overdrive pacing for the termination of induced and spontaneous monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) was compared with synchronized autodecremental (ramp) pacing in 21 patients who received an implantable antitachycardia pacemaker/cardioverter/defibrillator for treatment of recurrent sustained monomorphic VT. Patients undergoing serial noninvasive VT induction studies after device implantation were prospectively randomized to receive trials of burst or ramp pacing therapies in a crossover study design. Antitachycardia pacing therapies were equally efficacious in treating induced VT (68% for ramp, 76% for burst pacing trials). The efficacy of ramp (93%) and burst (96%) pacing therapies was significantly higher in terminating spontaneously occurring episodes of VT than in terminating induced episodes (p = 0.001). The incidence of tachycardia acceleration was similar for both modes of pacing. The incidence of VT acceleration was lower for spontaneously occurring episodes of VT (0.01%) than for induced episodes of VT (6%, p < 0.01). Thus, antitachycardia pacing is an effective therapy for episodes of monomorphic VT, and the risk of accelerating VT to a hemodynamically unstable form is low. Antitachycardia pacing therapies are more effective against spontaneously occurring episodes than induced episodes of VT. Differences in tachycardia cycle length and duration may contribute to these effects.