Replies to I'm not a physician but I'm skeptical that a >30% PAC burden should be considered benign....

Discussion

Heart Rhythm Conditions | Last Active: Sep 2 3:43pm | Replies (4)

Comment receiving replies

@rusjr

I'm not a physician but I'm skeptical that a >30% PAC burden should be considered benign. For one, there's a lot of evidence that a high PAC burden can lead to AF. And my understanding is that even in the absence of AF, those PACs may cause damage, eventually leading to cardiomyopathy. IMO you're correct in getting this addressed and treated. Best of luck in getting this sorted out.

Jump to this post

Replies to "I'm not a physician but I'm skeptical that a >30% PAC burden should be considered benign...."

gloaming | @gloaming | Sep 2 3:43pm

@rusjr The research I have seen recently shows the curve adjusting upward slightly for morbidity due to PAC burden at only 3%. It was a slight gradient change, but obvious and given to pause. I agree with you that 30% burden is excessive and dangerous, and I would urge someone with only a 10-15% burden to seek the services of a good electrophysiologist.

VIEW AND REPLY