The aim of this prospective study is comparing long-term prognosis in patients implanted with a VVI pacemaker (group A) with those implanted with a sequential pacing device, AAI or DDD, (group B). Both groups of 45 patients each, were comparable as regards to age, sex, pacing indications, underlying heart disease, and technical conditions of implantation and were followed-up over 55 months. Atrial arrhythmias (A.A.) incidence was higher in group A: 24.4% than group B: 8.8% (P less than 0.05). Arterial embolisms (A.E.) occurred in group A patients only. Worsening or occurrence of exercise limitation was more frequent in group A: 35.6% as compared to group B: 13.3% (P less than 0.05) and deaths related to these complications, occurred in seven cases in group A versus four cases in group B. In group A, all patients who experienced a worsening or occurrence of an A.A. or an A.E., had a ventriculoatrial conduction (VAC). No statistical difference was observed in worsening or occurrence of exercise limitation between patients with VAC and those without VAC: nine (42.8%) and seven (29.2%) but they respectively experienced at least one complication in 16 cases (76.2%) and seven cases (29.2%) (P less than 0.01). In conclusion, long-term prognosis in patients implanted with VVI pacing as compared to patients implanted with sequential pacing is poorer. The presence of VAC in patients treated with permanent VVI pacing is a major factor for complications and deaths related to A.E. and cardiac failure. Thus VVI pacing should be avoided in patients with VAC.