[Clinical Value of Algorithms of Minimization of Right Ventricular Pacing in Patients With Sick Sinus Syndrome and History of Atrial Fibrillation].

PURPOSE: to assess effectiveness of algorithms of minimization of right ventricular pacing (MRVP) for prevention of progression of atrial fibrillation (AF), lowering of frequency of hospitalizations due to cardiovascular causes, and mortality in patients with sick sinus syndrome (SSS) and history of paroxysmal AF compared with standard compared with dual-chamber pacing (DDDR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included in this single-center prospective study 74 consecutive patients with indications to permanent DDDR pacing because of SSS combined with documented history of paroxysmal AF. Patients were randomized in the groups of DDDR pacing (n=36) and with activated algorithms of MRVP (n=38). Pacemaker check up was made after 6 months during 1 year after device implantation. Primary composite endpoint included development of persistent AF, hospitalization due to cardiovascular causes, and all cause death. RESULTS: During follow-up there was no statistically significant difference in achievement of the primary endpoint (27.8 and 18.4% in groups of DDDR pacing and activated algorithms of MRVP respectively (relative risk 1.29% confidence interval 0.43 to 3.86; p=0.25). Rate of development of persistent AF in both groups was comparable (8.6 and 5.3% in DDDR and MRVP groups, respectively; p=0.47). Median AF burden was 6.0 (0;42) and 6.0 (0;42) min/day in DDDR and MRVP groups, respectively (p=0.67). CONCLUSION: Our study failed to demonstrate advantages of the use of algorithms of decreasing "unmotivated" right ventricular pacing over standard regimen of standard DDDR pacing in patients with SSS and history of paroxysmal AF.

[Study evaluating the impact of a combination of inotropic support and heart rate control on prognosis and stabilization rate in patients with decompensated chronic heart failure (LEGION)].

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of ivabradine and levosimendan in patients with acute circulatory decompensation. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study enrolled 41 patients (20 men and 21 women) aged 61 +/- 9 years, admitted for decompensated heart failure (NYHA functional class IV). Ejection fraction averaged 21.6%. In most patients, systolic blood pressure was below 105 mm Hg and heart rate (HR) was 100-115 beats/min. Central hemodynamics was measured using the strip tests. The patients' clinical status was rated applying the scale accepted in Russia. In addition to conventional therapy, Group 1 patients received levosimendan and ivabradine and Group 2 took dopamine after randomization. RESULTS: A significantly more pronounced clinical improvement was noted in Group 1 patients at hours 48 and 72 of determination. There was a significantly more marked HR reduction in Group 1 at 24 and 72 hours of observation. By day 3 of observation, pulmonary wedge pressure was significantly lower in Group 1 than in Group 2. In the same control periods, the increase in coronary perfusion pressure was significantly obvious in Group 1. The drastically increased level of N-terminal fragment of the prohormone brain-type natriuretic peptide was significantly reduced in both groups, but more considerably in Group 1. CONCLUSION: In patients with decompensated heart failure on conventional therapy, the co-administration of levosimendan and ivabradine is more effective than the use of dopamine.