Dual-chamber versus single chamber pacemakers, a systemic review and meta-analysis on sick sinus syndrome and atrioventricular block patients

Abdul Rehman Shah Syed; Abdullah Akram; Muhammad Shaheryar Azam; Ayesha Irshad Ansari; Muhammad Ali Muzammil; Abdul Ahad Syed; Shaheer Ahmed; Syeda Javeria Zakir

doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23877

Dual-chamber versus single chamber pacemakers, a systemic review and meta-analysis on sick sinus syndrome and atrioventricular block patients

Heliyon. 2023 Dec 18;10(1):e23877. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23877. eCollection 2024 Jan 15.

Authors

Abdul Rehman Shah Syed¹, Abdullah Akram¹, Muhammad Shaheryar Azam¹, Ayesha Irshad Ansari¹, Muhammad Ali Muzammil¹, Abdul Ahad Syed¹, Shaheer Ahmed¹, Syeda Javeria Zakir¹

Affiliation

¹ Dow University of Health Science (Medicine), Pakistan.

Abstract

Aims: The atrioventricular block (AVB) is a conduction system problem that results from the impairment in the transmission of an impulse from the atria to the ventricle, the disease has many etiologies. This article aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dual and single-chamber pacemakers in patients with SSS and AVB.

Methods: An electronic search of PubMed (Medline), EMBASE, and Google Scholar was performed from 2000 till August 15th, 2022. Retrieved articles were exported to Endnote Reference Library Software, where duplicate studies were removed from the list, and only articles meeting the eligibility criteria of this study were selected. RevMan 5.4 and STATA 16 software were used for the analysis. The modified Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias and New-castle Ottawa scale were used for quality assessment of RCTs and observational studies respectively.

Results: This study is composed of 8953 patients with sick-sinus syndrome and atrioventricular block. A total of thirteen outcomes are included in this meta-analysis, out of which atrial fibrillation significantly favored dual chamber [OR = 1.29; 95 % CI = 1.05-1.59; P = 0.01 I² = 29 %] and overall complications [OR = 0.48; 95 % CI = 0.29-0.77; p = 0.03 I² = 0 %] and pneumothorax [OR = 0.31; 95 % CI = 0.10-0.93; p = 0.04, I² = 0 %] were satisfied by single-chamber pacing.

Conclusion: This study concluded that neither single-chamber nor dual-chamber pacemakers are superior to each other, but they are unique in their own ways as the results of this study manifest remarkable reduction in atrial fibrillation rates and pneumothorax using dual-chamber and single-chamber pacemakers respectively.

Keywords: Atrioventricular block; Heart failure care; Sick-sinus syndrome; atrial fibrillation; pacemaker.