Smarter Decisions,
Better Care

UpToDate synthesizes the most recent medical information into evidence-based practical recommendations clinicians trust to make the right point-of-care decisions.

  • Rigorous editorial process: Evidence-based treatment recommendations
  • World-Renowned physician authors: over 5,100 physician authors and editors around the globe
  • Innovative technology: integrates into the workflow; access from EMRs

Choose from the list below to learn more about subscriptions for a:


Subscribers log in here


Indications for permanent cardiac pacing

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines for implantation of cardiac pacemakers have been established by a task force formed jointly by the American College of Cardiology, the American Heart Association, and the Heart Rhythm Society (ACC/AHA/HRS) [1,2]. Although there are occasional cases that cannot be categorized according to these guidelines, they are, for the most part, all-encompassing and have been widely endorsed. Similar and concordant guidelines have also been established by the European Society of Cardiology [3].

Some indications for permanent pacing are relatively certain or unambiguous, while others require considerable expertise and judgment. It is helpful to divide the indications for pacemaker implantation into three specific categories, or classes, as defined by the ACC/AHA/HRS guidelines [1,2]:

Class I – Conditions in which permanent pacing is definitely beneficial, useful, and effective. In such conditions, implantation of a cardiac pacemaker is considered acceptable and necessary, provided that the condition is not due to a transient cause.

Class II – Conditions in which permanent pacing may be indicated but there is conflicting evidence and/or divergence of opinion; class IIA refers to conditions in which the weight of evidence/opinion is in favor of usefulness/efficacy, while class IIB refers to conditions in which the usefulness/efficacy is less well established by evidence/opinion.

Class III – Conditions in which permanent pacing is not useful/effective and in some cases may be harmful.

                                

Subscribers log in here

To continue reading this article, you must log in with your personal, hospital, or group practice subscription. For more information or to purchase a personal subscription, click below on the option that best describes you:
Literature review current through: Mar 2014. | This topic last updated: Dec 14, 2012.
The content on the UpToDate website is not intended nor recommended as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your own physician or other qualified health care professional regarding any medical questions or conditions. The use of this website is governed by the UpToDate Terms of Use ©2014 UpToDate, Inc.
References
Top
  1. Epstein AE, DiMarco JP, Ellenbogen KA, et al. ACC/AHA/HRS 2008 Guidelines for Device-Based Therapy of Cardiac Rhythm Abnormalities: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 Guideline Update for Implantation of Cardiac Pacemakers and Antiarrhythmia Devices): developed in collaboration with the American Association for Thoracic Surgery and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation 2008; 117:e350.
  2. Tracy CM, Epstein AE, Darbar D, et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA/HRS focused update of the 2008 guidelines for device-based therapy of cardiac rhythm abnormalities: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. [corrected]. Circulation 2012; 126:1784.
  3. Vardas PE, Auricchio A, Blanc JJ, et al. Guidelines for cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy. The Task Force for Cardiac Pacing and Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association. Europace 2007; 9:959.
  4. Birnie D, Williams K, Guo A, et al. Reasons for escalating pacemaker implants. Am J Cardiol 2006; 98:93.
  5. Hayes DL, Barold SS, Camm AJ, Goldschlager NF. Evolving indications for permanent cardiac pacing: an appraisal of the 1998 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines. Am J Cardiol 1998; 82:1082.
  6. Recommendations for pacemaker prescription for symptomatic bradycardia. Report of a working party of the British Pacing and Electrophysiology Group. Br Heart J 1991; 66:185.
  7. Zeltser D, Justo D, Halkin A, et al. Drug-induced atrioventricular block: prognosis after discontinuation of the culprit drug. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44:105.
  8. Scheinman MM, Peters RW, Suavé MJ, et al. Value of the H-Q interval in patients with bundle branch block and the role of prophylactic permanent pacing. Am J Cardiol 1982; 50:1316.
  9. Dhingra RC, Wyndham C, Bauernfeind R, et al. Significance of block distal to the His bundle induced by atrial pacing in patients with chronic bifascicular block. Circulation 1979; 60:1455.
  10. European Heart Rhythm Association, Heart Rhythm Society, Zipes DP, et al. ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 guidelines for management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Develop Guidelines for Management of Patients With Ventricular Arrhythmias and the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death). J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 48:e247.