Physical activity detection in patients with intracardiac leadless pacemaker

Zsolt Bari, Mate Vamos, Peter Bogyi, Dwight Reynolds, Todd Sheldon, Dedra H. Fagan, G. Duray

Research output: Article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: The Micra Transcatheter Pacing System provides a rate adaptive pacing using an individually programmable three-axis accelerometer. We evaluated the short- and mid-term performance of the Micra activity sensor by testing all three available activity vectors during the exercise tests. Methods and Results: Implantation and follow-up data were prospectively collected from the patients undergoing Micra implantation at our institution. Patients underwent a 5-minute exercise test for each vector at predischarge (initial testing) and at scheduled in-office visits (repeat testing). On the basis of measurements of activity counts during the test, vectors were categorized to be adequate (excellent or acceptable) or poor. A total of 278 tests with 818 vector measurements were analyzed in 51 patients during follow-up (median duration was 18 months). Initial testing revealed the adequate quality of the nominal Vector 1 in 74.5% of the patients. Upon repeated testing at subsequent in-office visits, Vectors 1 and 3 were comparable (adequate quality in 64.7% vs 68.6% of the patients; P = 0.65) but better compared with Vector 2 (51.0%; P = 0.10 vs Vector 1, P = 0.01 vs Vector 3). In a subgroup of 45 patients programmed to VVIR mode, Vector 1 was selected in 46.7% of the patients after the initial test (Vector 2, 8.9%; Vector 3, 44.4%). Vector change was performed in 10 patients (22.2%) following repeated tests within 3 months of postimplantation. Conclusion: The three-axis accelerometer-based rate adaptive pacing feature proved to be feasible after manual selection of an adequate activity vector. Vector testing in Micra patients with chronotropic incompetence appears to be beneficial compared with the use of nominal Vector 1.

Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - jan. 1 2018

Fingerprint

Exercise
Office Visits
Exercise Test

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this

Physical activity detection in patients with intracardiac leadless pacemaker. / Bari, Zsolt; Vamos, Mate; Bogyi, Peter; Reynolds, Dwight; Sheldon, Todd; Fagan, Dedra H.; Duray, G.

In: Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Article

Bari, Zsolt ; Vamos, Mate ; Bogyi, Peter ; Reynolds, Dwight ; Sheldon, Todd ; Fagan, Dedra H. ; Duray, G. / Physical activity detection in patients with intracardiac leadless pacemaker. In: Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology. 2018.
@article{678f4104f1b540c18ee0858301305735,
title = "Physical activity detection in patients with intracardiac leadless pacemaker",
abstract = "Introduction: The Micra Transcatheter Pacing System provides a rate adaptive pacing using an individually programmable three-axis accelerometer. We evaluated the short- and mid-term performance of the Micra activity sensor by testing all three available activity vectors during the exercise tests. Methods and Results: Implantation and follow-up data were prospectively collected from the patients undergoing Micra implantation at our institution. Patients underwent a 5-minute exercise test for each vector at predischarge (initial testing) and at scheduled in-office visits (repeat testing). On the basis of measurements of activity counts during the test, vectors were categorized to be adequate (excellent or acceptable) or poor. A total of 278 tests with 818 vector measurements were analyzed in 51 patients during follow-up (median duration was 18 months). Initial testing revealed the adequate quality of the nominal Vector 1 in 74.5{\%} of the patients. Upon repeated testing at subsequent in-office visits, Vectors 1 and 3 were comparable (adequate quality in 64.7{\%} vs 68.6{\%} of the patients; P = 0.65) but better compared with Vector 2 (51.0{\%}; P = 0.10 vs Vector 1, P = 0.01 vs Vector 3). In a subgroup of 45 patients programmed to VVIR mode, Vector 1 was selected in 46.7{\%} of the patients after the initial test (Vector 2, 8.9{\%}; Vector 3, 44.4{\%}). Vector change was performed in 10 patients (22.2{\%}) following repeated tests within 3 months of postimplantation. Conclusion: The three-axis accelerometer-based rate adaptive pacing feature proved to be feasible after manual selection of an adequate activity vector. Vector testing in Micra patients with chronotropic incompetence appears to be beneficial compared with the use of nominal Vector 1.",
keywords = "intracardiac pacemaker, leadless pacemaker, Micra pacemaker, rate adaptive pacing, rate response, three-axis accelerometer",
author = "Zsolt Bari and Mate Vamos and Peter Bogyi and Dwight Reynolds and Todd Sheldon and Fagan, {Dedra H.} and G. Duray",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/jce.13729",
language = "English",
journal = "Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology",
issn = "1045-3873",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Physical activity detection in patients with intracardiac leadless pacemaker

AU - Bari, Zsolt

AU - Vamos, Mate

AU - Bogyi, Peter

AU - Reynolds, Dwight

AU - Sheldon, Todd

AU - Fagan, Dedra H.

AU - Duray, G.

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Introduction: The Micra Transcatheter Pacing System provides a rate adaptive pacing using an individually programmable three-axis accelerometer. We evaluated the short- and mid-term performance of the Micra activity sensor by testing all three available activity vectors during the exercise tests. Methods and Results: Implantation and follow-up data were prospectively collected from the patients undergoing Micra implantation at our institution. Patients underwent a 5-minute exercise test for each vector at predischarge (initial testing) and at scheduled in-office visits (repeat testing). On the basis of measurements of activity counts during the test, vectors were categorized to be adequate (excellent or acceptable) or poor. A total of 278 tests with 818 vector measurements were analyzed in 51 patients during follow-up (median duration was 18 months). Initial testing revealed the adequate quality of the nominal Vector 1 in 74.5% of the patients. Upon repeated testing at subsequent in-office visits, Vectors 1 and 3 were comparable (adequate quality in 64.7% vs 68.6% of the patients; P = 0.65) but better compared with Vector 2 (51.0%; P = 0.10 vs Vector 1, P = 0.01 vs Vector 3). In a subgroup of 45 patients programmed to VVIR mode, Vector 1 was selected in 46.7% of the patients after the initial test (Vector 2, 8.9%; Vector 3, 44.4%). Vector change was performed in 10 patients (22.2%) following repeated tests within 3 months of postimplantation. Conclusion: The three-axis accelerometer-based rate adaptive pacing feature proved to be feasible after manual selection of an adequate activity vector. Vector testing in Micra patients with chronotropic incompetence appears to be beneficial compared with the use of nominal Vector 1.

AB - Introduction: The Micra Transcatheter Pacing System provides a rate adaptive pacing using an individually programmable three-axis accelerometer. We evaluated the short- and mid-term performance of the Micra activity sensor by testing all three available activity vectors during the exercise tests. Methods and Results: Implantation and follow-up data were prospectively collected from the patients undergoing Micra implantation at our institution. Patients underwent a 5-minute exercise test for each vector at predischarge (initial testing) and at scheduled in-office visits (repeat testing). On the basis of measurements of activity counts during the test, vectors were categorized to be adequate (excellent or acceptable) or poor. A total of 278 tests with 818 vector measurements were analyzed in 51 patients during follow-up (median duration was 18 months). Initial testing revealed the adequate quality of the nominal Vector 1 in 74.5% of the patients. Upon repeated testing at subsequent in-office visits, Vectors 1 and 3 were comparable (adequate quality in 64.7% vs 68.6% of the patients; P = 0.65) but better compared with Vector 2 (51.0%; P = 0.10 vs Vector 1, P = 0.01 vs Vector 3). In a subgroup of 45 patients programmed to VVIR mode, Vector 1 was selected in 46.7% of the patients after the initial test (Vector 2, 8.9%; Vector 3, 44.4%). Vector change was performed in 10 patients (22.2%) following repeated tests within 3 months of postimplantation. Conclusion: The three-axis accelerometer-based rate adaptive pacing feature proved to be feasible after manual selection of an adequate activity vector. Vector testing in Micra patients with chronotropic incompetence appears to be beneficial compared with the use of nominal Vector 1.

KW - intracardiac pacemaker

KW - leadless pacemaker

KW - Micra pacemaker

KW - rate adaptive pacing

KW - rate response

KW - three-axis accelerometer

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053756993&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053756993&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/jce.13729

DO - 10.1111/jce.13729

M3 - Article

C2 - 30176097

AN - SCOPUS:85053756993

JO - Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology

JF - Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology

SN - 1045-3873

ER -