PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11258106

[Mode-switching algorithms: programming and usefulness].

C W Israel
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Automatic mode switching is defined as the ability of a pacemaker to reprogram itself from tracking to non-tracking mode in response to atrial tachyarrhythmias, and to regain tracking mode as soon as the tachyarrhythmia terminates. In contrast to upper rate behavior, mode switching does not only limit atrial tracking at a certain rate but actively drives the ventricular pacing rate back to lower rate or sensor rate as long as the atrial tachyarrhythmia persists. In contrast to DDD with mode switch, AV synchrony may be lost in DDIR mode if the sinus rate exceeds the sensor rate. DDD pacing with mode switching represents a valuable option in patients with AV block and paroxysmal atrial tachyarrhythmias. It may prevent the transition from paroxysmal to permanent atrial fibrillation after AV node ablation to a higher extent than VVI(R) pacing. On the other hand, patients with sinus node disease and normal AV conduction may benefit from DDIR mode with long AV interval. Mode switching should provide a rapid, sensitive and specific detection of atrial tachyarrhythmias, fast switch to non-tracking mode without ventricular pacing at the upper rate limit, adequate ventricular rate during the atrial tachyarrhythmia, rapid, sensitive and specific detection of conversion to sinus rhythm and fast switch back to tracking mode. In addition, oscillations between DDD and DDI mode with sudden ventricular rate changes should be avoided. MODE-SWITCHING ALGORITHMS: To achieve these aims, different mode-switching algorithms have been developed which all show specific disadvantages: reliable but slow response to atrial tachyarrhythmias, fast but unspecific switch to non-tracking mode, mode oscillations, inclination to inadequate mode-switching due to ventricular far-field sensing, failure to perform modeswitching during atrial flutter or intermittent atrial undersensing. Some of these problems can be avoided by careful atrial lead implantation providing atrial signals above 2 mV and avoiding ventricular far-field signals. Programming of mode-switching related parameters (e.g. atrial rate and number of fast beats required for mode switch), atrial blanking times, and atrial sensitivity can solve some of the problems with mode switching. Clinical results show a strong influence of device programming and atrial undersensing on mode-switching performance. Some data suggest a superiority of fast mode-switching algorithms with regard to clinical symptoms. However, loss of AV synchrony during sinus rhythm due to premature or inadequate mode switching may limit the benefit of fast mode switching. FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS: Improved performance may be achieved by a combination of different mode-switching algorithms (e.g. one algorithm for detection of atrial fibrillation, another one for detection of atrial flutter). In addition, programmability of several algorithms (e.g. mean atrial rate, beat-to-beat, x out of y) within the same device and atrial cycle-dependent sensitivity adjustment similar to automatic gain control in implantable defibrillators may further increase the clinical use of automatic mode switching.

Explore related subjects

AlgorithmsArrhythmias, CardiacAtrial FibrillationAtrial FlutterCardiac Pacing, ArtificialElectrocardiographyElectrodes, ImplantedHeart RateHumansPacemaker, ArtificialPatient SelectionProspective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityTachycardiaTachycardia, SupraventricularTime FactorsComparative StudyEnglish AbstractJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C W Israel. 2001. [Mode-switching algorithms: programming and usefulness].. https://doi.org/10.1007/pl00002003

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

A note on a generalized single step theory for any number of hierarchical genomic matrices.

BACKGROUND: The Single Step algorithm allows combining information from genotyped and un-genotyped individuals, provided they are connected by a pedigree. However, current single step theory is limited to a single list of markers. RESULTS: We present a generalized single step (GSS) method that can accommodate any number of hierarchical molecular datasets (e.g. sequence, high and low density arrays) and pedigree, avoiding imputation. We prove that a similar efficient inversion algorithm exists. The method is recursive, starting with the highest marker density scenario. We illustrate the method with simulation and show that GSS can increase predictive accuracy compared to standard single step. R code is provided so that custom scenarios can be easily compared, either with simulated or real data. CONCLUSION: The method developed generalizes extant single step theory to any number of hierarchical molecular relationship matrices, broadening the scenarios where single step can be applied. A topic of particular interest can be ecology field data or human populations where pedigree is not available, but where samples sequenced and genotyped at different densities can exist. GSS can also be a useful tool to optimize allocation of genotyping and / or sequencing resources.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2026

cgDist: Nucleotide-level distance calculation from cgMLST allelic profiles.

Bacterial genomic surveillance requires balancing computational efficiency with genetic resolution for effective cluster investigation. cgMLST distance calculations treat all allelic differences as equivalent units, obscuring nucleotide-level variation. Furthermore, single nucleotide polymorphism-based pipelines provide finer resolution at substantially higher computational cost, which limits their routine deployment in surveillance laboratories. We present cgDist, an algorithm that calculates nucleotide-level distances directly from cgMLST allelic profiles, providing finer resolution than allele-count distances by leveraging within-allele nucleotide variation. The cache architecture stores alignment statistics, enabling distance calculation modes without computation and supporting both dataset-specific and schema-complete cache generation. This design enables incremental surveillance analysis, with performance benefits as laboratories accumulate alignment data. cgDist functions as a precision 'zoom lens' for the investigation of clusters identified through initial cgMLST screening. Rather than restructuring population relationships, this targeted approach concentrates enhanced resolution where it is most informative. The algorithm ensures that cgDist distances are greater than or equal to corresponding cgMLST distances, preserving epidemiological interpretability while adding genetic discrimination. By increasing resolution within identified clusters, cgDist may also support outbreak investigation, a potential application that remains to be evaluated on outbreak-derived data.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2026

Theseus: fast and optimal affine-gap sequence-to-graph alignment.

MOTIVATION: Sequence-to-graph alignment is a central problem in bioinformatics, with applications in multiple sequence alignment (MSA) and pangenome analysis, among others. However, current algorithms for optimal affine-gap alignment impose high memory and computational requirements, limiting their scalability to aligning long sequences to complex graphs. Practical solutions partially address this problem using heuristic strategies that ultimately trade off optimality for speed. RESULTS: This work presents Theseus, a novel, fast, and optimal affine-gap sequence-to-graph alignment algorithm. Theseus leverages similarities between genomic sequences to accelerate the alignment computation and reduces the overall memory requirements without compromising optimality. To that end, Theseus processes only a subset of the dynamic programming cells, using a sparse-data strategy that enables efficient sequence-to-graph alignment. Moreover, our algorithm supports optimal affine-gap alignment on arbitrary directed graphs, including those with cycles. We evaluate Theseus on two key problems: MSA and pangenome read mapping. For MSA, we compare it against SPOA, abPOA, and POASTA. Theseus is 1.6× to 17.6× faster than POASTA, and 7.3× faster, on average, than SPOA, both optimal aligners. Compared with abPOA, Theseus ensures optimality and scales to the largest problems. For pangenome read mapping, we benchmark Theseus against the alignment stage of the mapping tool vg map, along with the alignment kernels of SPOA, abPOA, and POASTA. Theseus outperforms the other methods, showing a 1.9× to 16.9× speedup on short reads. Moreover, Theseus is 1.5× to 36.3× faster than vg when aligning against synthetic cyclic graphs. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Theseus code and documentation are publicly available at https://github.com/albertjimenezbl/theseus-lib.

Algorithms↗