Differences in pacemaker programming between electrophysiology specialists and other physicians

Abstract

Background: Appropriate programming of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) is essential to ensure adequate function and avoid harmful effects. In underdeveloped countries, CIED monitoring and programming are often performed by physicians involved in their implantation. However, many of them often do not have sufficient training in CIED programming. Objective: We aimed to assess the differences in pacemaker programming between electrophysiology (EP) specialists and other physicians. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed changes in pacemaker programming performed by an EP specialist in patients who attended for pacemaker evaluation and reported previous follow-ups by a non-EP specialist. Results: Among 58 patients (26 males), 41 patients (71%) had programming errors and required setting modifications. The rate adaptative pacing function (R-mode) was incorrectly deactivated in 9 patients (15%) and improperly activated in 2 patients (3%). Unnecessary ventricular stimulation was detected in 23 patients (40%) with a pacing burden of 60% (32–95%). The lower rate limit was unnecessarily high in 12 patients (21%).Atrial or ventricular pacing output was inappropriate in 15 patients (26%) and was consequently modified (4 patients unnecessarily high, 9 patients below requirements). The auto-adapted pacing output was switched off in 17 of 18 patients (16 due to physician's preference, and 1 due to algorithm inaccuracy). The programmed sensitivity was inaccurate in 2 patients (3%). In 2 patients (3%) switching from DDDR to VVIR mode was required. Conclusion: We found a high prevalence of errors in pacemaker programming by non-EP specialists. An EP specialist should always be responsible for CIED follow-up.

Keywords

• Pacemaker programming
• Electrophysiology evaluation
• Ventricular pacing burden