The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Correspondence
PreviousPrevious
Volume 343:1417-1418 November 9, 2000 Number 19
NextNext

Effects of Physiologic Pacing versus Ventricular Pacing

Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
-Purchase this article

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-Related Article
 by Connolly, S. J.
To the Editor: The article by Connolly et al. (May 11 issue)1 on physiologic pacing as compared with ventricular pacing was published prematurely, since the period of follow-up (range, two to five years) was simply too short for the true advantages of one type of pacing over the other to become fully manifest. The physiologic virtues of normally timed atrial transport were described in 1911,2 and the consequences of retrograde ventriculoatrial conduction (a harbinger of symptoms of the "pacemaker syndrome" in the recipients of antiarrhythmia devices and in all likelihood the mechanism that triggers subsequent atrial fibrillation) in 1913.3 More . . . [Full Text of this Article]

References




HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  TERMS OF USE  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.