Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Mar 14;329(10):801-809.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2023.0675.

Rate-Adaptive Atrial Pacing for Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: The RAPID-HF Randomized Clinical Trial

Yogesh N V Reddy  1 , Katlyn E Koepp  1 , Rickey Carter  2 , Sithu Win  3 , Christopher Charles Jain  1 , Thomas P Olson  1 , Bruce D Johnson  1 , Robert Rea  1 , Margaret M Redfield  1 , Barry A Borlaug  1
Affiliations

Rate-Adaptive Atrial Pacing for Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: The RAPID-HF Randomized Clinical Trial

Yogesh N V Reddy et al. JAMA. .

Abstract

Importance: Reduced heart rate during exercise is common and associated with impaired aerobic capacity in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), but it remains unknown if restoring exertional heart rate through atrial pacing would be beneficial.

Objective: To determine if implanting and programming a pacemaker for rate-adaptive atrial pacing would improve exercise performance in patients with HFpEF and chronotropic incompetence.

Design, setting, and participants: Single-center, double-blind, randomized, crossover trial testing the effects of rate-adaptive atrial pacing in patients with symptomatic HFpEF and chronotropic incompetence at a tertiary referral center (Mayo Clinic) in Rochester, Minnesota. Patients were recruited between 2014 and 2022 with 16-week follow-up (last date of follow-up, May 9, 2022). Cardiac output during exercise was measured by the acetylene rebreathe technique.

Interventions: A total of 32 patients were recruited; of these, 29 underwent pacemaker implantation and were randomized to atrial rate responsive pacing or no pacing first for 4 weeks, followed by a 4-week washout period and then crossover for an additional 4 weeks.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary end point was oxygen consumption (V̇o2) at anaerobic threshold (V̇o2,AT); secondary end points were peak V̇o2, ventilatory efficiency (V̇e/V̇co2 slope), patient-reported health status by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score (KCCQ-OSS), and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels.

Results: Of the 29 patients randomized, the mean age was 66 years (SD, 9.7) and 13 (45%) were women. In the absence of pacing, peak V̇o2 and V̇o2 at anaerobic threshold (V̇o2,AT) were both correlated with peak exercise heart rate (r = 0.46-0.51, P < .02 for both). Pacing increased heart rate during low-level and peak exercise (16/min [95% CI, 10 to 23], P < .001; 14/min [95% CI, 7 to 21], P < .001), but there was no significant change in V̇o2,AT (pacing off, 10.4 [SD, 2.9] mL/kg/min; pacing on, 10.7 [SD, 2.6] mL/kg/min; absolute difference, 0.3 [95% CI, -0.5 to 1.0] mL/kg/min; P = .46), peak V̇o2, minute ventilation (V̇e)/carbon dioxide production (V̇co2) slope, KCCQ-OSS, or NT-proBNP level. Despite the increase in heart rate, atrial pacing had no significant effect on cardiac output with exercise, owing to a decrease in stroke volume (-24 mL [95% CI, -43 to -5 mL]; P = .02). Adverse events judged to be related to the pacemaker device were observed in 6 of 29 participants (21%).

Conclusions and relevance: In patients with HFpEF and chronotropic incompetence, implantation of a pacemaker to enhance exercise heart rate did not result in an improvement in exercise capacity and was associated with increased adverse events.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02145351.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Borlaug reported receiving research support from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (R01 HL128526 and U01 HL160226) and the US Department of Defense (W81XWH2210245); receiving research grant funding from AstraZeneca, Axon, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Mesoblast, Novo Nordisk, and Tenax Therapeutics; and serving as a consultant for Actelion, Amgen, Aria, Axon Therapies, Becton Dickinson, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Edwards Lifesciences, Eli Lilly, Imbria, Janssen, Merck, Novo Nordisk, NGM Biopharmaceuticals, NXT Pharma, and VADovations; and that he is a named inventor (US Patent 10 307 179) for the tools and approach for a minimally invasive pericardial modification procedure to treat heart failure. Dr Reddy reported receiving research grant funding from Bayer, Sleep Number, and United Pharmaceuticals. Dr Redfield reported that she is supported in part by NIH grants U01 HL160226 and R01 HL 144529. Dr Olson reported that he is supported in part by NIH grant NR018832. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Study Design and Patient Flow in Trial of Rate-Adaptive Atrial Pacing for Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
CPET indicates cardiopulmonary exercise test; KCCQ-OSS, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score; NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Heart Rate Dynamics
A, Peak exercise heart rate during pacing-off phase was positively associated with peak oxygen consumption (V̇o2) (r = .51, P = .006). B, Tukey box plots represent median and interquartile range, with whiskers extending to the minimum and maximum values. Pacing-on phase was associated with a higher heart rate during submaximal (stage 1 of treadmill) and peak exercise, P < .001 for both comparisons (n = 28 for all 3 pacing-off phases and n = 29 for all 3 pacing-on phases, because 1 patient did not complete the pacing-off–phase exercise test).
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Parallel Line Plots of Primary and Select Secondary End Points
Each vertical line represents an individual patient, with patients ordered by baseline value with pacing off, with the vertical line extending up (improvement) or down (deterioration) in the pacing-on phase. For panel A, P = .46; panel B, P = .27; and panel C, P = .86. KCCQ-OSS indicates Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score; V̇o2, oxygen consumption; V̇o2,AT, oxygen consumption at anaerobic threshold.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Borlaug BA, Melenovsky V, Russell SD, et al. . Impaired chronotropic and vasodilator reserves limit exercise capacity in patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction. Circulation. 2006;114(20):2138-2147. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.632745 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brubaker PH, Joo KC, Stewart KP, Fray B, Moore B, Kitzman DW. Chronotropic incompetence and its contribution to exercise intolerance in older heart failure patients. J Cardiopulm Rehabil. 2006;26(2):86-89. doi:10.1097/00008483-200603000-00007 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Phan TT, Shivu GN, Abozguia K, et al. . Impaired heart rate recovery and chronotropic incompetence in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Circ Heart Fail. 2010;3(1):29-34. doi:10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.109.877720 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kosmala W, Rojek A, Przewlocka-Kosmala M, Mysiak A, Karolko B, Marwick TH. Contributions of nondiastolic factors to exercise intolerance in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(6):659-670. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.10.096 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Reddy YNV, Olson TP, Obokata M, Melenovsky V, Borlaug BA. Hemodynamic correlates and diagnostic role of cardiopulmonary exercise testing in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. JACC Heart Fail. 2018;6(8):665-675. doi:10.1016/j.jchf.2018.03.003 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data

-