Single lead DDD system: a comparative evaluation of unipolar, bipolar, and overlapping biphasic stimulation and the effects of right atrial floating electrode location on atrial pacing and sensing thresholds

• Published in: Pacing and clinical electrophysiology Vol. 19; no. 11 Pt 2; p. 1758
• Main Authors: Tse, H F, Lau, C P, Leung, S K, Leung, Z, Mehta, N
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.11.1996
• Subjects: Aged; Atrial Fibrillation - physiopathology; Atrial Fibrillation - therapy; Atrial Function, Right; Cardiac Pacing, Artificial - methods; Diaphragm; Electric Stimulation - instrumentation; Electric Stimulation - methods; Electrocardiography; Electrocardiography, Ambulatory; Electrodes; Equipment Design; Equipment Safety; Evaluation Studies as Topic; Female; Heart Block - physiopathology; Heart Block - therapy; Heart Rate; Humans; Male; Pacemaker, Artificial; Posture; Sinoatrial Node - physiopathology
• ISSN: 0147-8389
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1996.tb03219.x

Single lead DDD pacing using unipolar or bipolar stimulation is limited by high atrial threshold. Overlapping biphasic (OLBI) waveform stimulation via atrial floating ring electrodes may preferentially enhance atrial pacing and avoid diaphragmatic pacing. Single lead DDD pacing with OLBI atrial pacing was studied in 12 patients (6 men and 6 women; mean age 74 +/- 7 years) with complete heart block. At implantation, atrial bipolar rings (area 27 mm2, separation 10 mm) were positioned at radiological defined high, mid, and low right atrial (RA) levels, and P wave amplitude and atrial and diaphragmatic pacing thresholds were determined in each position using unipolar, bipolar, and OLBI stimulation in random order. Although statistically insignificant, both the maximum and minimum sensed P wave amplitudes tended to be lower in the low RA position. Independent of the stimulation modes, minimum atrial pacing threshold occurred in the mid-RA. At mid-RA, the atrial pacing threshold was significantly lower with OLBI pacing compared with either unipolar or bipolar mode (3.9 +/- 2.2 V vs 6.7 +/- 3.5 V and 6.9 +/- 3.5 V, P < 0.05). Although the diaphragmatic thresholds were similar, OLBI pacing modes in the mid-RA and final location significantly improved the safety margin for avoidance of diaphragmatic pacing compared with unipolar mode. There was no correlation between atrial pacing and sensing threshold. At predischarge testing, all but one patient who developed atrial fibrillation had satisfactory atrial capture and a stable atrial pacing threshold (day 0: 2.6 +/- 1.1V vs day 2:3.2 +/- 1.3V, P = NS). However, diaphragmatic pacing occurred in four of 11 (36%) patients, especially in the upright position (sitting and standing). Our preliminary clinical results suggest that OLBI pacing via atrial floating ring electrodes can reduce the atrial pacing threshold. To optimize atrial pacing and sensing, the bipolar electrodes should be located at the mid-RA level first, although the high RA is an alternative. Despite significant improvements in the safety margin for diaphragmatic pacing with OLBI pacing, diaphragmatic stimulation remains a clinical problem.