Bifocal right ventricular pacing: an alternative way to achieve resynchronization when left ventricular lead insertion is unsuccessful

2012 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Skevos Sideris ◽  
Constantina Aggeli ◽  
Emmanouil Poulidakis ◽  
Kostas Gatzoulis ◽  
Ioannis Vlaseros ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhao Wang ◽  
Haojie Zhu ◽  
Xiaofei Li ◽  
Yan Yao ◽  
Zhimin Liu ◽  
...  

Background: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a novel physiological pacing approach.Objective: To assess learning curve for LBBAP and compare the procedure and fluoroscopy time between LBBAP and right ventricular pacing (RVP).Methods: Consecutive bradycardia patients who underwent LBBAP or RVP were prospectively recruited from June 2018 to June 2020. The procedure and fluoroscopy time for ventricular lead placement, pacing parameters, and periprocedural complications were recorded. Restricted cubic splines were used to fit learning curves for LBBAP.Results: Left bundle branch area pacing was successful in 376 of 406 (92.6%) patients while 313 patients received RVP. Learning curve for LBBAP illustrated initial (1–50 cases), improved (51–150 cases), and stable stages (151–406 cases) with gradually increased success rates (88.0 vs. 90.0 vs. 94.5%, P = 0.106), steeply decreased median procedure (26.5 vs. 14.0 vs. 9.0min, P < 0.001) and fluoroscopy time (16.0 vs. 6.0 vs. 4.0min, P < 0.001), and shortened stimulus to left ventricular activation time (Sti-LVAT; 78.7 vs. 78.1 vs. 71.2 ms, P < 0.001). LBBAP at the stable stage showed longer but close median procedure (9.0 vs. 6.9min, P < 0.001) and fluoroscopy time (4.0 vs. 2.8min, P < 0.001) compared with RVP.Conclusion: The procedure and fluoroscopy time of LBBAP could be reduced significantly with increasing procedure volume and close to that of RVP for an experienced operator.


EP Europace ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
BV Silva ◽  
J Brito ◽  
T Rodrigues ◽  
P Silverio Antonio ◽  
S Couto Pereira ◽  
...  

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction   Adverse hemodynamic effects of right ventricular pacing are known, and the optimal right ventricular lead position is still being a matter of debate. According to the guidelines, upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is recommended in patients with indication for pacemaker and left ventricular ejection fraction less than 50% or who need more than 40% of ventricular pacing. Purpose   To compare clinical outcomes and ejection fraction in patients with previous pacemaker (apical versus septal right ventricular pacing) who are upgrated to CRT.  Methods   Single-center retrospective study of 94 consecutive patients who had previous pacemaker and upgraded to CRT over a 4-year period. Of these patients, 64 had previous apical lead pacemaker and 30 had previous septal lead pacemaker. Data on comorbidities, New York Heart Association (NYHA), left ventricular ejection fraction and hospitalizations due to heart failure were collected. The results were obtained using Chi-square, Mann-Whitney and t-test. Results Patients with septal pacemaker had significantly more diabetes (p = 0.04) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (p = 0.01), tended to be more symptomatic (p = 0.198) and had more days of hospitalization before and after pacemaker implantation (12 ± 3 versus 7 ± 2 days and 8 ± 4 versus 3 ± 1 days, respectively), mostly due heart failure decompensation.  Although there were no significant differences in the initial ejection fraction in patients with apical or septal pacemaker implantation (31.2 ± 1.2% and 29.1 ± 1.5%, respectively, p = 0.323), the time to upgrade to CRT was significantly shorter in patients with septal pacemaker implantation (1999 ± 227 days versus 3005 ± 279 days, p = 0.005).  After upgrading to CRT, patients with apical lead had a significant increase in ejection fraction (8.2%, p = 0.011), while patients with septal lead had a non-significant improvement of ejection fraction (4.5%, p = 0.448). In both, apical and septal lead patients, there was a significant improvement in NYHA class after upgrade to CRT (p = 0.03 and p = 0.02, respectively). Conclusion   Although patients with septal lead had more comorbidities and hospitalizations due to heart failure, they do not benefit from the upgrade to CRT, unlike what happens in patients with apical lead. These findings can be explained by the fact that the septal lead minimizes ventricular desynchrony induced by right ventricular pacing.


Author(s):  
Thijs Stoker ◽  
Theo J. Klinkenberg ◽  
Alexander H. Maass ◽  
Massimo A. Mariani

We describe two cases in which a biventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillator for cardiac resynchronization therapy had to be placed on the right side due to unsuitability of the left subclavian vein. Endocardial implantation of a left ventricular lead through the coronary sinus was previously attempted but was unsuccessful. Implantation of the epicardial left ventricular pacing lead was performed through video-assisted thoracic surgery on the left side. The connector end of the left ventricular pacing lead was tunnelized through the anterior mediastinum into the right pleural space. The right-sided pocket was then opened. A tunnel was created from the pocket to the thoracic wall, and the pleural space was entered over the second rib. The lead was retrieved from the right pleural space and connected with the Cardiac resynchronization therapy-device (CRT-D). Both procedures and postoperative periods were uneventful. Intrathoracic left-to-right tunneling of an epicardial left ventricular lead by video-assisted thoracic surgery is feasible and safe. It provides an alternative to subcutaneous tunneling.


2009 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. S12-S15
Author(s):  
HARAN BURRI ◽  
HENRI SUNTHORN ◽  
MARC ZIMMERMANN ◽  
CARINE STETTLER ◽  
DIPEN SHAH

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alaa Solaiman Algazzar ◽  
Azza Ali Katta ◽  
Khaled Sayed Ahmed ◽  
Nasima Mohamed Elkenany ◽  
Maher Abdelaleem Ibrahim

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong-Xia Niu ◽  
Xi Liu ◽  
Min Gu ◽  
Xuhua Chen ◽  
Chi Cai ◽  
...  

Introduction: For patients who develop atrioventricular block (AVB) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), right ventricular pacing (RVP) may be associated with adverse outcomes. We assessed the feasibility of conduction system pacing (CSP) in patients who developed AVB following TAVR and compared the procedural and clinical outcomes with RVP.Methods: Consecutive patients who developed AVB following TAVR were prospectively enrolled, and were implanted with RVP or CSP. Procedural and clinical outcomes were compared among different pacing modalities.Results: A total of 60 patients were enrolled, including 10 who were implanted with His bundle pacing (HBP), 20 with left bundle branch pacing (LBBP), and 30 with RVP. The HBP group had significantly lower implant success rate, higher capture threshold, and lower R-wave amplitude than the LBBP and RVP groups (p < 0.01, respectively). The RVP group had a significantly longer paced QRS duration (153.5 ± 6.8 ms, p < 0.01) than the other two groups (HBP: 121.8 ± 8.6 ms; LBBP: 120.2 ± 10.6 ms). During a mean follow-up of 15.0 ± 9.1 months, the LBBP group had significantly higher left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (54.9 ± 6.7% vs. 48.9 ± 9.1%, p < 0.05) and shorter left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) (49.7 ± 5.6 mm vs. 55.0 ± 7.7 mm, p < 0.05) than the RVP group. While the HBP group showed trends of higher LVEF (p = 0.016) and shorter LVEDD (p = 0.017) than the RVP group. Four patients in the RVP group died—three deaths were due to progressive heart failure and one was due to non-cardiac reasons. One death in the LBBP group was due to the non-cardiac reasons.Conclusions: CSP achieved shorter paced QRS duration and better cardiac structure and function in post-TAVR patients than RVP. LBBP had a higher implant success rate and better pacing parameters than HBP.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document