Is Dual-Chamber Programming Inferior to Single-Chamber Programming in an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator?

Background— The INTRINSIC RV (Inhibition of Unnecessary RV Pacing with AVSH in ICDs) study tested the hypothesis that dual-chamber rate-responsive (DDDR) with atrioventricular search hysteresis (AVSH) 60-130 programming is not inferior to single-chamber (VVI)–40 programming in an implantable cardioverter defibrillator with respect to all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalizations using an equivalence margin of 5%. Methods and Results— At 108 centers, 1530 patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator indication received a VITALITY AVT (Guidant Corporation, St. Paul, Minn) implantable cardioverter defibrillator programmed consistently to DDDR AVSH 60-130 for the first week. Of those, 988 patients with <20% right ventricular pacing at 1 week were randomized to DDDR AVSH 60-130 or to VVI-40 programming. Among those randomized, 502 were assigned to DDDR AVSH and 486 to VVI. Groups were similar with regard to coronary disease (68%), gender (21% female), and New York Heart Association functional class >I (79%). A total of 32 patients (6.4%) in the DDDR AVSH arm and 46 patients (9.5%) in the VVI arm died or were hospitalized for heart failure during a mean follow-up of 10.4 months (relative risk=0.67, P =0.072 in favor of DDDR AVSH). DDDR AVSH was not inferior to VVI programming ( P <0.001). All-cause mortality was not significantly different between the DDDR AVSH arm (3.6%) and the VVI arm (5.1%; P =0.23). The mean percent right ventricular pacing in the DDDR AVSH arm was 10% (median 4%) versus 3% (median 0%) in the VVI arm. Conclusions— In the INTRINSIC RV trial, among those randomized, DDDR AVSH was associated with similar outcomes as with VVI backup pacing.