Reasons for escalating pacemaker implants.

Surveys of pacing practice have shown a steady increase in pacemaker implantation rates in the past 15 years, despite no major changes in United States guidelines for permanent pacing. There are no data to explain why this is occurring. In this study, records were extracted from the National Hospital Discharge Survey to investigate this. There were 3 major findings. First, age-adjusted implantation rates increased progressively over the study period from 370 per million in 1990 to 612 per million in 2002. Second, it was found that the escalating implantation rate is attributable to increasing implantation for isolated sinus node dysfunction (SND). Implantation for SND increased significantly over the study period (by 102%), whereas implantation for all other indications did not. The increasing implantation for SND is due primarily to the increasing prevalence of SND, with a lesser increase in implantation rate relative to prevalence rate. The third major finding of this study is that there has been a progressive relative and absolute increase in the dual-chamber implantation rate. In 2002, 82.8% of all initial pacemaker implantations were dual-chamber devices. Furthermore, the National Hospital Discharge Survey data indicate that the major randomized pacing trials seem to have had no impact on pacing practice in the United States. In conclusion, age-adjusted implantation rates increased progressively over the study period. This escalating implantation rate is primarily attributable to increasing implantation for SND.

[1]  J. Mason,et al.  Guidelines for implantation of cardiac pacemakers and antiarrhythmia devices. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Assessment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Cardiovascular Procedures (Committee on Pacemaker Implantation). , 1991, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[2]  D. Mark,et al.  Bias in the coding of hospital discharge data and its implications for quality assessment. , 1994, Medical care.

[3]  G. Lamas,et al.  Have the Results of Randomized Clinical Trials of Pacing Altered the Practice of Cardiac Pacing? , 2003, Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology.

[4]  C. Goodman.  American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Assessment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Cardiovascular Procedures , 1988 .

[5]  L. Goldman,et al.  Quality of life and clinical outcomes in elderly patients treated with ventricular pacing as compared with dual-chamber pacing. , 1998, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[6]  S. Connolly,et al.  Canadian Trial of Physiological Pacing: Effects of Physiological Pacing During Long-Term Follow-Up , 2004, Circulation.

[7]  R. Pokras,et al.  Design and operation of the National Hospital Discharge Survey: 1988 redesign. , 2000, Vital and health statistics. Ser. 1, Programs and collection procedures.

[8]  G. L’italien,et al.  The expanding national burden of heart failure in the United States: the influence of heart failure in women. , 2004, American heart journal.

[9]  G. Lamas,et al.  Adverse Effect of Ventricular Pacing on Heart Failure and Atrial Fibrillation Among Patients With Normal Baseline QRS Duration in a Clinical Trial of Pacemaker Therapy for Sinus Node Dysfunction , 2003, Circulation.

[10]  M Gent,et al.  Effects of physiologic pacing versus ventricular pacing on the risk of stroke and death due to cardiovascular causes , 2000 .

[11]  Keiji Fukuda,et al.  Influenza-associated hospitalizations in the United States. , 2004, JAMA.

[12]  C. Morillo,et al.  The World Survey of Cardiac Pacing and Cardioverter Defibrillators: Calendar Year 2001 , 2004, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[13]  R. Gibbons,et al.  ACC/AHA guidelines for implantation of cardiac pacemakers and antiarrhythmia devices: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Pacemaker Implantation). , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[14]  Richard P. Lewis,et al.  ACC/AHA PRACTICE GUIDELINES ACC/AHA Guidelines for Implantation of Cardiac Pacemakers and Antiarrhythmia Devices , 2016 .

[15]  L. Goldman,et al.  Ventricular pacing or dual-chamber pacing for sinus-node dysfunction. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  Gabriel Gregoratos,et al.  心臓ペースメーカー及び抗不整脈デバイスの植込みに関するACC/AHAガイドライン アメリカ合衆国心臓学会/アメリカ心臓協会の診療ガイドラインに関するタスクフォースの報告(ペースメーカー植込みに関する委員会) , 1998 .

[17]  L. Thuesen,et al.  Prospective randomised trial of atrial versus ventricular pacing in sick-sinus syndrome , 1994, The Lancet.

[18]  R. Kerber,et al.  ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 Guideline Update for Implantation of Cardiac Pacemakers and Antiarrhythmia Devices , 2002 .

[19]  R. Kerber,et al.  ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 guideline update for implantation of cardiac pacemakers and antiarrhythmia devices: summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/NASPE Committee to Update the 1998 Pacemaker Guidelines). , 2002, Circulation.

[20]  A. Bernstein,et al.  Survey of Cardiac Pacing and Implanted Defibrillator Practice Patterns in the United States in 1997 , 2001, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[21]  M A Hlatky,et al.  ACC/AHA Guidelines for Implantation of Cardiac Pacemakers and Antiarrhythmia Devices: Executive Summary--a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Pacemaker Implantation). , 1998, Circulation.

[22]  R. Kaczmarek,et al.  The Epidemiology of Cardiac Pacemakers in the Older US Population , 1998, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[23]  G. Lip,et al.  Dual chamber versus single chamber ventricular pacemakers for sick sinus syndrome and atrioventricular block. , 2004, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.