Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Pacemaker procedure and survival times in dogs with slow heart rates
By Genovese, David W et al.·Published in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2013·Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Procedure times, complication rates, and survival times associated with single-chamber versus dual-chamber pacemaker implantation in dogs with clinical signs of bradyarrhythmia: 54 cases (2004-2009).
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 54 dogs showing signs of slow heart rates (bradyarrhythmia) underwent pacemaker implantation to help regulate their heartbeats. The study compared two types of pacemakers: single-chamber and dual-chamber. While the dual-chamber pacemakers took longer to implant, they did not lead to more complications than the single-chamber ones. Both types of pacemakers were effective, and the dogs generally did well after the procedure.
People also search for: dog slow heart rate treatment · pacemaker for dogs · dual-chamber vs single-chamber pacemaker dogs
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare procedure times and major and minor complication rates associated with single-chamber versus dual-chamber pacemaker implantation and with 1-lead, 2-lead, and 3-lead pacemaker implantation in dogs with clinical signs of bradyarrhythmia. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. ANIMALS: 54 dogs that underwent pacemaker implantation because of clinical signs of bradyarrhythmia. PROCEDURES: Medical records of dogs that received pacemakers between July 2004 and December 2009 were reviewed for information regarding signalment, diagnosis, pacemaker implantation, pacemaker type, complications, and survival time. Analyses were performed to determine significant differences in anesthesia time, procedure time, and outcome for dogs on the basis of pacing mode and number of pacing leads. RESULTS: 28 of 54 (51.9%) dogs received single-chamber pacemakers and 26 (48.1%) received dual-chamber pacemakers. Mean ± SD procedural time was significantly longer for patients with dual-chamber pacemakers (133.5 ± 51.3 minutes) than for patients with single-chamber pacemakers (94.9 ± 37.0 minutes), and procedure time increased significantly as the number of leads increased (1 lead, 102.3 ± 51.1 minutes; 2 leads, 114.9 ± 24.8 minutes; 3 leads, 158.2 ± 8.5 minutes). Rates of major and minor complications were not significantly different between dogs that received single-chamber pacemakers and those that received dual-chamber pacemakers or among dogs grouped on the basis of the number of pacing leads placed. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although dual-chamber pacemaker implantation did result in increased procedural and anesthesia times, compared with single-chamber pacemaker implantation, this did not result in a higher complication rate.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23276101/