The effects of rate-adaptive atrial pacing versus ventricular backup pacing on exercise capacity in patients with left ventricular dysfunction

Background: Atrial rate-adaptive pacing may improve cardiopulmonary reserve in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Methods: A randomized, blinded, single-crossover design enrolled dual-chamber implantable defibrillator recipients without pacing indications and an ejection fraction ≤40% to undergo cardiopulmonary exercise treadmill stress testing in both atrial rate-adaptive pacing (AAIR) and ventricular demand pacing (VVI) pacing modes. The primary endpoint was change in peak oxygen consumption (VO₂). Secondary endpoints were changes in anaerobic threshold, perceived exertion, exercise duration, and peak blood pressure. Results: Ten patients, nine males, eight with New York Heart Association class I, mean ejection fraction 24 ± 7%, were analyzed. Baseline VO₂ was 3.6 ± 0.5 mL/kg/min. Heart rate at peak exercise was significantly higher during AAIR versus VVI pacing (142 ± 18 vs 130 ± 23 bpm; P = 0.05). However, there was no difference in peak VO₂ (AAIR 23.7 ± 6.1 vs VVI 23.8 ± 6.3 mL/kg/min; P = 0.8), anaerobic threshold (AAIR 1.3 ± 0.3 vs VVI 1.2 ± 0.2 L/min; P = 0.11), rate of perceived exertion (AAIR 7.3 ± 1.5 vs VVI 7.8 ± 1.2; P = 0.46), exercise duration (AAIR 15 minutes, 46 seconds ± 2 minutes, 54 seconds vs VVI 16 minutes, 3 seconds ± 2 minutes, 48 seconds; P = 0.38), or peak systolic blood pressure (AAIR 155 ± 22 vs VVI 153 ± 21; P = 0.61) between the two pacing modes. Conclusion: In this study, AAIR pacing did not improve peak VO_2, anaerobic threshold, rate of perceived exertion, or exercise duration compared to VVI backup pacing in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and no pacing indications.