Skip Navigation



Europace Advance Access published online on April 17, 2008
Europace, doi:10.1093/europace/eun093
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
10/7/832    most recent
eun093v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by van Eck, J. W.M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by van Eck, J. W.M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2008. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Routine follow-up after pacemaker implantation: frequency, pacemaker programming and professionals in charge

Jacob W.M. van Eck1,*, Norbert M. van Hemel2, Willem G. de Voogt3, Joan G. Meeder4, Hans A. Spierenburg5, Har Crommentuyn4, Rens Keijzer5, Diederick E. Grobbee1, Karel G.M. Moons on behalf of the FOLLOWPACE investigators1

1 Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Bolognalaan 12, 3584 CJ Utrecht, The Netherlands; 2 Department of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, The Netherlands; 3 Department of Cardiology, Sint Lucas Andreas Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 4 Department of Cardiology, VieCuri Medical Center, Venlo, The Netherlands; 5 Department of Cardiology, Vlietland Hospital, Schiedam, The Netherlands

Aims: To describe current evidence of the frequency, contents, and involved professionals of the routine follow-up visits in patients who have received a pacemaker (PM).

Methods and results: The multicentre FOLLOWPACE study prospectively collected data during implantation and follow-up of 1526 patients who received a PM for the first time. A total of 4914 follow-up visits were studied. Mean follow-up was 394 days with a mean of 3.2 visits per patient. At all follow-up visits, the battery condition was tested in >93%, the stimulation threshold in >91%, and sensing in >87%. The pacemaker parameters as stimulation and sensing thresholds, lead impedances, and percentages of pacing remained stable over time, but these values did depend on the lead location, lead fixation, and pulse duration. The majority of PM (re-)programming was performed during implantation and/or shortly before hospital discharge (50%). PM re-programming during follow-up was most frequently performed by the PM technician alone (95%).

Conclusion: Crucial PM parameters are regularly checked. Re-programming of PM parameters declined during the first year after PM implantation. The majority of PM checks were carried out by the PM technician, indicating the major influence of the allied professional on the quality and safety of the pacing therapy.

Key Words: Pacemaker, Follow-up, Device monitoring

* Corresponding author. Tel: +31 30 2506545; fax: +31 30 2505481. E-mail address: j.w.m.vaneck-2{at}umcutrecht.nl

Manuscript submitted 18 December 2007. Accepted after revision 24 March 2008.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.