179-02: First-degree atrioventricular Block, Atrioventricular (Dys)synchrony and Dual-chamber pacing. A long PR interval or a wide QRS? That is the dilemma

Background: In modern DDD pacemakers, strategies to minimize artificial right ventricular activation seek to avoid the potential but well-studied deleterious effects of cardiac pacing. While these mechanisms maintain electrical atrioventricular (AV) sequence, if significant 1st. degree AV block (1st.AVB) coexists, paradoxically AV mechanical dyssynchrony could be promoted. Apparently, atrioventricular sequence differs from atrioventricular synchrony. The purpose of this study was to elucidate clinical and hemodynamic results of long AV delays - narrow intrinsic QRS against DDD pacing with optimized AV interval - paced wide QRS. Methods: Prospectively included 32 adult patients with DDD pacemakers implanted for sick sinus node disease (SSND) and 1st.AVB. Study protocol demanded septal right ventricular lead, demonstrated <5% of ventricular pacing overall since implantation, normal QRS duration, preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), no prosthetic valves and no history of atrial fibrillation (AF). Using Doppler echocardiography diastolic and systolic performances were verified in AAI pacing 10 beats/min faster than sinus rhythm, intrinsic long AV delay and native QRS (Ap-Vs), against the hemodynamic results (VTi, LVEF and Mitral regurgitation obtained by iteratively shortening the programmed AV delay (DDD pacing - Ap-Vp) at same cardiac rate. By Mitral valve inflow analysis (E/A waves measurements) optimal diastolic function (AV synchrony) was verified. Best left ventricular contractility and function was assessed by means of higher aortic flow time velocity integral (VTi) and LVEF. Optimal AV delay was defined by maximal separation of E/A waves, higher VTi and best LVEF with less Mitral valve regurgitation. AV dyssinchrony was determined by fused E + A waves, or E + A duration <40% of cardiac cycle. This patients were kept to ventricular pacing at the optimal AV interval (optimized AV – OAV group) for further comparison. The non-optimized AV (NOAV) group was formed by those whose best cardiac function was found at the intrinsic PR interval-native QRS. This group was kept to minimal ventricular pacing at the baseline PR interval. Follow-up included clinical evaluation and cardiac structure and function assessment at 3 and 6 months for both groups of patients. Results: Our cohort so far (mean= 73,6 + /-11,8 years) confirmed the existence of 2 separate groups from the diastolic function point of view: those showing AV dyssynchrony requiring AV optimization (OAV group: 18/32) and those with no AV dyssynchrony (no need for AV optimization - NOAV group: 14/32); p= 0.003. No other statistical differences were found in age, gender, symptoms, NYHA functional class, medication use, and structural heart disease, baseline PR interval or LVEF between groups. AAI pacing rate for echo measurements was 65 + /-9bpm for the OAV group vs. 67,5 + /-6,7bpm of their counterparts (p= NS). Remarkably, the AV interval when exceeded 263ms in the OAV group was 72% sensitive and 73% specific to demonstrate AV dyssynchrony. Moreover, in the OAV group, under optimized AV delay and artificial ventricular pacing, after 6 months of follow-up, LVEF is noticed to significantly decline (p= 0.002) and detrimental changes of cardiac structure with significant increase in left ventricular systolic (p= 0.04) and diastolic (p= 0.02) dimensions are noticed. No other statistical differences at follow-up were found in clinical outcomes (incidence of new AF episodes, electronic arrhythmias, pacemaker syndrome-like symptoms, NYHA functional class or hospitalizations) between groups. Conclusion: Our results preliminarily suggest that 1st.AVB with non-physiologically prolonged AV conduction (when ≥263ms) is highly associated with disturbed AV synchrony. However, this AV dyssynchrony when corrected by echocardiographycally optimized AV delays and forced ventricular pacing is negatively affected by the detrimental consequences of continual right ventricular artificial activation. Alternative-pacing strategies such as biventricular-pacing in this scenario merit further investigation.