REPLY

Natural intelligence.

Healthcare Professionals Cardiac Rhythm Management Pacemakers REPLY

REPLY

A pacemaker family inspired by nature. Natural intelligence.

The world’s smallest dual-chamber pacemaker with no compromise on longevity.1–3

Reply DR includes SafeR, the only AV management algorithm proven to be effective and safe for all of your patients with bradycardia.1, 4

12 years longevity in only 8 cc.

The world’s smallest dual-chamber pacemaker with no compromise on longevity.1–3

REPLY DR Micro Port 2018
Safer

SafeR™

Dramatically reduces unnecessary RV pacing in all pacemaker patients, including AV block patients.

Discover this therapy
Dual

Dual Sensor™

Designed to physiologically modulate heart rhythm by combining Accelerometer and Minute Ventilation sensors.

Discover this therapy

SafeR™

  • Advanced AV management for increased protection4,5–11
  • Reduces RV pacing in SND and AVB patients4
  • Manages ALL types of AV blocks at rest and at exercise1,4
  • Adds 2 YEARS of device longevity10,11
  • Unique AV block diagnosis
Kora3

Dual sensor

  • Adjust to metabolic needs. Exercise safely
  • Designed to physiologically modulate the heart rhythm by combining Accelerometer and Minute Ventilation sensors

This product is not available for sale or distribution in the USA. For further information on product availability, please contact your local representative.

REFERENCES

  1. Sorin implant manuals (Reply – 0979-0980-O981-O982) available at www.microportmanuals.com
  2. Competition comparison across transvenous pacing systems made as of September 2020, refer to manufacturers manuals available online
  3. Reply with typical conditions using SafeR: 50% A pacing, 5% V pacing, 60 bpm, 2.5V, 0.35ms, 750 ohms, EGM & Diagnostics ON, Sensors ON.
  4. Stockburger M, et al. Long-term clinical effects of ventricular pacing reduction with a changeover mode to minimize ventricular pacing in general population (ANSWER study). Euro Heart J. 2015;36:151–57.
  5. Andersen HR, et al. Long-term follow-up of patients from a randomized trial of atrial versus ventricular pacing for sick-sinus syndrome. Lancet. 1997; 350:1210-16.
  6. Skanes AC, et al. Progression to chronic atrial fibrillation after pacing: The Canadian Trial Of Physiologic Pacing (CTOPP). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001; 38:167–72.
  7. Nielsen J, et al. A randomized comparison of atrial and dual chamber pacing in 177 consecutive patients with sick sinus syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003; 42:614–23.
  8. Sweeney M, et al. 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. Circulation. 2003;107: 2932–37.
  9. Wilkoff BL, et al. Dual-chamber pacing or ventricular backup pacing in patients with an implantable defibrillator: the Dual Chamber and VVI Implantable Defibrillator (DAVID trial). JAMA. 2002;288:3115–23.
  10. Stockburger M, et al. Safety and efficiency of ventricular pacing prevention with an AAI-DDD changeover mode in patients with sinus node disease or atrioventricular block: impact on battery longevity-a substudy of the ANSWER trial. Europace 2016;18:739–46.
  11. Benkemoun H, et al. Optimizing pacemaker longevity with pacing mode and settings programming: results from a pacemaker multicenter registry. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2012;35:403–08.