Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of indiapaceSubmissionsIndian Pacing and Electrophysiology Journal
Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J. 2010; 10(9): 379–382.
Published online 2010 September 5.
PMCID: PMC2933365

AV Interval Optimization - A Step Towards Physiological Pacing in Patients with Normal Left Ventricular Function

"In wilderness I sense the miracle of life, and behind it our scientific accomplishments fade to trivia." Charles A. Lindbergh.

Pacemakers have evolved over a period of time trying to mimic the normal response rates, conduction and activation characteristics, though are still far from what nature has bestowed upon us. Better understanding of cardiac physiology and hemodynamics has led to current available pacing technology and we do recognize now that to achieve physiological pacing we should have an appropriate heart rate response, ventriculo-ventricular (VV) synchronization and atrio-ventricular (AV) synchronization.

Patients receiving rate responsive pacemakers for sinus node dysfunction, in spite of using various sensors and rate response algorithms [1-5], still do not truly have an appropriate heart rate response, especially in absence of physical stress. There is a need to develop sensors, based on which an algorithm can be developed to achieve a heart rate response, which truly mimics to what a normal sinus node would behave in response to both physical and mental stress. In patients with heart block who have atrial sensing based ventricular pacing, the heart rate response remains appropriate if the sinus node is normal.

Right ventricular (RV) pacing represents a non-physiological activation of the heart causing wide QRS (left bundle branch block) with electrical and mechanical VV dyssynchrony [5]. Higher percentage of ventricular pacing in patients with intact AV node has been found to be associated with increased incidence of atrial fibrillation and heart failure on follow up [6-10]. Algorithms to prevent ventricular pacing are effective in reducing unnecessary ventricular pacing in patients with normal AV conduction and sick sinus syndrome. However these algorithms cannot be applied to patients with advanced heart block in which there is need for mandatory ventricular pacing. To avoid detrimental effects of VV synchrony alternate site RV pacing [11-15] and biventricular pacing have been described. [16,17] Alternate site pacing studies have shown mixed results [11-15]. Left sided lead placement, non-physiological epicardial pacing and procedure and pacing related complications with the higher overall cost involved in doing biventricular pacing procedure represents a significant limitation for advising it as a routine. VV dyssynchrony possibly would remain a limitation in achieving total physiological pacing till further conclusive evidence of newer pacing methods is demonstrated.

Optimal AV interval at rest ranges from 100 to 150 milliseconds. In normal individuals the AV interval shortens with increased heart rate during exercise in a predictable and linear fashion. Most pacemakers have a programmable shortening of AV delay at higher rates, the hemodynamic benefits of which have not yet been shown [1]. The aim of optimizing AV delay in patients with heart failure is to increase diastolic filling and at the same time maintain biventricular pacing so as to maximize cardiac output. In patients with heart failure and LV dysfunction even a small improvement in cardiac output, as obtained by optimizing AV delay, may result in significant clinical improvement. AV optimization is routinely done using echocardiographic techniques of which Ritter's method is the most commonly used [18]. Device based algorithms like QuickOpt is also available and is currently being evaluated for its effectiveness in comparison to echocardiographic methods [19]. Optimizing AV synchrony and hence AV delay is routinely not advised in patients receiving pacemakers without heart failure.

An electrocardiogram based method to determine optimal AV interval is described by Sorajja et al [20] in this issue of the journal, in which P wave duration correlates with a correction factor of 1.26 with an optimal AV interval, as determined by Ritter's method of AV optimization on echocardiography. Such simple technique can be used for effectively programming optimal AV delay routinely once validation by large trials occur, so as to achieve better hemodynamics without the need for time consuming echocardiographic techniques or till the time echocardiographic optimization is routinely planned. This study, though with its limitations of having a small cohort of elderly patients and optimization evaluated only at rest, presents an attractive alternative to echocardiography based techniques to calculate and program optimal AV delay.

Based on echocardiographic parameters and natriuretic peptide levels, AV delay optimization is found to be beneficial in patients with normal LV function in short term small studies [21-25]. There exists hardly any long term study to demonstrate benefits of routine optimization of AV delay in patients having normal LV function and receiving pacemakers for heart block. Hence it would be difficult to justify echocardiography based AV optimization in all such patients. However it seems appropriate to aim to program an optimal AV delay in all patients receiving pacemakers, based on data from heart failure patients and short term studies. Can the findings of this study be extrapolated for use in AV optimization in patients treated with devices for heart failure? Larger studies in patients with and without LV dysfunction and heart failure would be required to validate the results of this pilot study for incorporating it in clinical practice to achieve better long term outcomes. We still have a long way to go before we can mimic with pacemakers the normal electrical activity of the heart.

Adopt the pace of nature: her secret is patience - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Look deep into nature, and then you will understand everything better - Albert Einstein


  • Buckingham TA, et al. Pacemaker hemodynamics: clinical implications. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 1992;34:347. [PubMed]
  • Israel CW, et al. Current status of dual-sensor pacemaker systems for correction of chronotropic incompetence. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:282. [PubMed]
  • Dell'Orto S, et al. Sensors for rate responsive pacing. Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J. 2004;4:137. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Chandiramani S, et al. Heart rate changes during acute mental stress with closed loop stimulation: report on two single-blinded, pacemaker studies. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2007;30:976. [PubMed]
  • Lau CP, et al. Rate adaptive pacing in sick sinus syndrome: effects of pacing modes and intrinsic conduction on physiological responses, arrhythmias, symptomatology and quality of life. Eur Heart J. 1994;15:1445. [PubMed]
  • Tops LF, et al. The effects of right ventricular apical pacing on ventricular function and dyssynchrony implications for therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:764. [PubMed]
  • Albertsen AE, et al. Selecting the appropriate pacing mode for patients with sick sinus syndrome: evidence from randomized clinical trials. Card Electrophysiol Rev. 2003;7:406. [PubMed]
  • Hesselson AB, et al. Deleterious effects of long-term single-chamber ventricular pacing in patients with sick sinus syndrome: the hidden benefits of dual-chamber pacing. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992;19:1542. [PubMed]
  • Wilkoff BL, et al. Dual-chamber pacing or ventricular backup pacing in patients with an implantable defibrillator: the Dual Chamber and VVI Implantable Defibrillator (DAVID) Trial. JAMA. 2002;288:3115. [PubMed]
  • Wilkoff BL, et al. The DAVID (Dual Chamber and VVI Implantable Defibrillator) II trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:872. [PubMed]
  • Sweeney MO, et al. A new paradigm for physiologic ventricular pacing. Am J Cardiol. 2000;86:86K. [PubMed]
  • Siu CW, et al. Analysis of ventricular performance as a function of pacing site and mode. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2008;51:171. [PubMed]
  • Ng AC, et al. Long-term impact of right ventricular septal versus apical pacing on left ventricular synchrony and function in patients with second- or third-degree heart block. Am J Cardiol. 2009;103:1096. [PubMed]
  • Kaye G, et al. Search for the optimal right ventricular pacing site: design and implementation of three randomized multicenter clinical trials. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2009;32:426. [PubMed]
  • Tse HF, et al. Upgrading pacemaker patients with right ventricular apical pacing to right ventricular septal pacing improves left ventricular performance and functional capacity. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2009;20:901. [PubMed]
  • van Geldorp IE, et al. Beneficial effects of biventricular pacing in chronically right ventricular paced patients with mild cardiomyopathy. Europace. 2010;12:223. [PubMed]
  • Delnoy PP, et al. Long-term clinical response of cardiac resynchronization after chronic right ventricular pacing. Am J Cardiol. 2009;104:116. [PubMed]
  • Barold SS, et al. Echocardiographic optimization of the atrioventricular and interventricular intervals during cardiac resynchronization. Europace. 2008;10(10):iii88. [PubMed]
  • Abraham WT, et al. Rationale and design of a randomized clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of frequent optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy: the Frequent Optimization Study Using the QuickOpt Method (FREEDOM) trial. Am Heart J. 2010;159:944. [PubMed]
  • Sorajja D, et al. Utilization of Electrocardiographic P-wave Duration for AV Interval Optimization in Dual-Chamber Pacemakers. Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J. 2010;10:383. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Leonelli FM, et al. Systolic and diastolic effects of variable atrioventricular delay in patients with complete heart block and normal ventricular function. Am J Cardiol. 1997;80:294. [PubMed]
  • Porciani CM, et al. A perspective on atrioventricular delay optimization in patients with a dual chamber pacemaker. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2004;27:338. [PubMed]
  • Styliadis IH, et al. Effects of variation of atrioventricular interval on left ventricular diastolic filling dynamics and atrial natriuretic peptide levels in patients with DDD pacing for complete heart block. Europace. 2005;7:576. [PubMed]
  • Panou FK, et al. Effect of different AV delays on left ventricular diastolic function and ANF levels in DDD paced hypertensive patients during daily activity and exercise. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1999;22:635. [PubMed]
  • Ritter P, et al. Determination of the optimal atrioventricular delay in DDD pacing. Comparison between echo and peak endocardial acceleration measurements. Europace. 1999;1:126. [PubMed]

Articles from Indian Pacing and Electrophysiology Journal are provided here courtesy of Elsevier