572 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9118155)
1. [An intrapatient comparison of adaptation to aerobic and anaerobic exertion during 3 types of physiological cardiac stimulation in chronotropic failure of the sinus node: DDD, VVIR and DDDR].
Occhetta E; Perucca A; Fazzari M; Pistis G; Baduini G; Trevi G
Cardiologia; 1997 Jan; 42(1):51-7. PubMed ID: 9118155
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [DDD versus DDDR pacemaker stimulation: comparison of cardiopulmonary performance, incidence of atrial arrhythmias and quality of life].
Epperlein S; Kreft A; Siegert V; Liebrich A; Himmrich E; Treese N
Z Kardiol; 1996 Apr; 85(4):226-36. PubMed ID: 8693765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Improved cardiac function and quality of life following upgrade to dual chamber pacing after long-term ventricular stimulation.
Höijer CJ; Brandt J; Willenheimer R; Juul-Möller S; Boström PA
Eur Heart J; 2002 Mar; 23(6):490-7. PubMed ID: 11863352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A randomized double-blind crossover comparison of four rate-responsive pacing modes.
Sulke N; Chambers J; Dritsas A; Sowton E
J Am Coll Cardiol; 1991 Mar; 17(3):696-706. PubMed ID: 1993790
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Rate adaptive pacing in sick sinus syndrome: effects of pacing modes and intrinsic conduction on physiological responses, arrhythmias, symptomatology and quality of life.
Lau CP; Tai YT; Leung WH; Wong CK; Lee P; Chung FL
Eur Heart J; 1994 Nov; 15(11):1445-55. PubMed ID: 7835358
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Use of a rate responsive pacemaker in sick sinus syndrome].
Ito T; Nishino M; Nakagawa T; Okada T; Hasegawa S; Kuryu T; Ebisuno S; Ohnishi S; Tanahashi H; Yasuno M
Kokyu To Junkan; 1993 Jan; 41(1):63-7. PubMed ID: 8434162
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Haemodynamic advantage with single chamber rate responsive pacemakers over dual chamber pacemakers during exercise in chronotropic incompetence.
Maity AK; Ghosh SP; Dasbiswas A; Chatterjee SS; Chaudhury D; Das MK
Indian Heart J; 1992; 44(4):231-4. PubMed ID: 1289220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The incremental benefit of rate-adaptive pacing on exercise performance during cardiac resynchronization therapy.
Tse HF; Siu CW; Lee KL; Fan K; Chan HW; Tang MO; Tsang V; Lee SW; Lau CP
J Am Coll Cardiol; 2005 Dec; 46(12):2292-7. PubMed ID: 16360061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Aerobic capacity in rate modulated pacing.
Lemke B; Dryander SV; Jäger D; Machraoui A; MacCarter D; Barmeyer J
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 1992 Nov; 15(11 Pt 2):1914-8. PubMed ID: 1279571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Long-term haemodynamic and antiarrhythmic benefits of DDIR versus DDI pacing mode in sick sinus syndrome and chronotropic incompetence.
Santini M; Ricci R; Puglisi A; Mangiameli S; Proclemer A; Menozzi C; De Fabrizio G; Leoni G; Lisi F; De Seta F
G Ital Cardiol; 1997 Sep; 27(9):892-900. PubMed ID: 9378194
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Effects of chronotropic responsive cardiac pacing on ventilatory response to exercise in patients with bradycardia].
Tani M; Fujiki A; Asanoi H; Mizumaki K; Yoshida S; Tsuji H; Sasayama S
J Cardiol; 1992; 22(2-3):503-12. PubMed ID: 1339809
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparative evaluation of rate modulated dual chamber and VVIR pacing.
Jutzy RV; Florio J; Isaeff DM; Marsa RJ; Bansal RC; Jutzy KR; Levine PA; Feenstra L
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 1990 Dec; 13(12 Pt 2):1838-46. PubMed ID: 1704551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. DDD versus VVIR versus VVI mode in patients with indication to dual-chamber stimulation: a prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind study.
Moro E; Caprioglio F; Berton G; Marcon C; Riva U; Corbucci G; Delise P
Ital Heart J; 2005 Sep; 6(9):728-33. PubMed ID: 16212074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Chronotropic competence in patients with the sick sinus syndrome wearing AAI or DDD pacemakers].
Goicolea de Oro A; Márquez L; López Gil M; Kallmeyer C; Chicote R; García-Cosío F
Rev Esp Cardiol; 1993 Jun; 46(6):335-9. PubMed ID: 8316699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Antiarrhythmic benefits of dual chamber stimulation with rate-response in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and chronotropic incompetence: a prospective, multicentre study.
Bellocci F; Spampinato A; Ricci R; Puglisi A; Capucci A; Dini P; Boriani G; Botto G; Curnis A; Moracchini PV; Nicotra G; Lisi F; Nigro P
Europace; 1999 Oct; 1(4):220-5. PubMed ID: 11220558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Adverse effect of ventricular pacing on heart failure and atrial fibrillation among patients with normal baseline QRS duration in a clinical trial of pacemaker therapy for sinus node dysfunction.
Sweeney MO; Hellkamp AS; Ellenbogen KA; Greenspon AJ; Freedman RA; Lee KL; Lamas GA;
Circulation; 2003 Jun; 107(23):2932-7. PubMed ID: 12782566
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Rate responsive pacing using cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with chronotropic incompetence and chronic heart failure.
Sims DB; Mignatti A; Colombo PC; Uriel N; Garcia LI; Ehlert FA; Jorde UP
Europace; 2011 Oct; 13(10):1459-63. PubMed ID: 21551475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Exercise hemodynamic benefits of rate adaptive ventricular pacing.
Ma J; Wang F; Zhang K; Yu P; Wang J; Chen X
Chin Med J (Engl); 1996 Jun; 109(6):459-62. PubMed ID: 9206079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. AAIR versus DDDR pacing in patients with impaired sinus node chronotropy: an echocardiographic and cardiopulmonary study.
Vardas PE; Simantirakis EN; Parthenakis FI; Chrysostomakis SI; Skalidis EI; Zuridakis EG
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 1997 Jul; 20(7):1762-8. PubMed ID: 9249829
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation by cardiopulmonary exercise test of DDDR versus DDD pacing.
Capucci A; Boriani G; Specchia S; Marinelli M; Santarelli A; Magnani B
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 1992 Nov; 15(11 Pt 2):1908-13. PubMed ID: 1279570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
