The Effect of his Bundle Pacing on QRS Duration in an Initial Patient Cohort

Abstract Background Left bundle branch block (LBBB) occurs frequently after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and is associated with increased risk of permanent pacemaker implantation, heart failure hospitalization and sudden cardiac death. This pilot study explored the feasibility of TAVR-induced LBBB correction with His bundle pacing (HBP). Methods Patients with TAVR -induced LBBB and postoperative need for permanent pacemaker implant were planned for electrophysiology study and HBP. Patients with persistent high degree AV-block were excluded. HBP was performed using the Select Secure pacing lead, delivered through a fixed curve or a deflectable sheath. Successful HBP was defined as correction of LBBB by selective or non-selective HBP with LBBB correction thresholds less than 3.5V at 1.0ms at implant. Results The study enrolled 6 patients (mean age 85±2.5 years, 50% male). Mean QRS duration was 152±10ms, PR-interval 212±12ms AH-interval 166±16ms and HV-interval 62±12ms. Successful HBP was achieved in 5/6 (83%) patients. Mean QRS duration decreased from 153±11ms to 88±14ms (p=0.002). At implantation, mean threshold for LBBB correction was 1.6±1.0V (unipolar) and 2.2±1.3V (bipolar) at 1.0ms. Periprocedural, two complete AV-blocks occurred, both spontaneously resolved by the end of the procedure. Thresholds remained stable at 1 month follow up: 1.8±1.0V (unipolar) and 2.3±1.5V (bipolar) at 1.0ms. Figure 1 Conclusion Permanent His bundle pacing can safely correct TAVR-induced LBBB in the majority of patients. Further studies are needed to assess potential benefits of His bundle pacing over conventional right ventricular pacing in this population.

Download Full-text

Abstract 17180: Longitudinal Dissociation in the His Bundle: Persistent Bundle Branch Block Can be Corrected by Permanent His Bundle Pacing

Circulation ◽

10.1161/circ.130.suppl_2.17180 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 130 (suppl_2) ◽

Author(s):

Pugazhendhi Vijayaraman ◽

Kenneth A Ellenbogen ◽

Gopi Dandamudi

Keyword(s):

Main Body ◽

Exclusion Criteria ◽

Pacing Threshold ◽

Bundle Branch Block ◽

His Bundle ◽

His Bundle Pacing ◽

Number Of Patients ◽

Pacing Lead ◽

Qrs Duration ◽

Longitudinal Dissociation

Introduction: Focal disease in the main body of the His bundle (HB) is the cause for majority of the bundle branch block (BBB) patterns on EKG. Temporary distal HB pacing (HBP) has previously been shown to correct BBB in high number of patients. Anecdotal reports have confirmed abolition of BBB by permanent HBP. Hypothesis: The aim of our study is to report the incidence of correction of BBB during permanent HBP in patients undergoing pacemaker (PM) implantation. Methods: Permanent HBP was attempted in 185 patients referred for PM implantation. Pts with QRS duration (d) ≥110 ms and BBB were included in the study. Pts with normal QRS or CHB were excluded. HBP was performed using the Medtronic SelectSecure 3830 pacing lead. Baseline QRSd, paced QRSd, correction of BBB and HB pacing threshold were recorded. Results: Fifty patients met the inclusion-exclusion criteria. Mean age 73±12 yrs; men 65%, HTN 81%, DM 30%, CAD 38%, AF 42%, SSS 39%, AV disease 61%, RBBB 31, LBBB 14, IVCD 5). Permanent HBP was successful in correcting BBB in 42 (84%) patients. Underlying BBB was corrected by HBP in 29 of 31 (94%) patients with RBBB; 11 of 14 (79%) patients with LBBB; 1 of 5 (20%) patients with IVCD. Baseline QRSd improved from 141±15 ms to 124±17 ms. HBP threshold at implant was 1.5±1.3 V @ 0.5 ms. Conclusions: Permanent HBP corrected underlying BBB in the vast majority of patients with right or left BBB (40 of 45, 89%) compared to only 1 of 5 (20%) patients with IVCD. This confirms that focal disease in the main HB is the cause for BBB in the patients referred for PM implantation.

Download Full-text

Can atrioventricular node ablation be safely performed in patients with permanent His bundle pacing? Data from a multicentric registry

European Heart Journal ◽

10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0550 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽

Author(s):

C Chaumont ◽

N Auquier ◽

A Mirolo ◽

E Popescu ◽

A Milhem ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Right Ventricular ◽

Rate Control ◽

Atrioventricular Node ◽

Atrial Arrhythmia ◽

Av Node ◽

His Bundle ◽

His Bundle Pacing ◽

Ventricular Lead ◽

Qrs Duration

Abstract Introduction Ventricular rate control is essential in the management of atrial fibrillation. Atrioventricular node ablation (AVNA) and ventricular pacing can be an effective option when pharmacological rate control is insufficient. However, right ventricular pacing (RVP) induces ventricular desynchronization in patients with normal QRS and increases the risk of heart failure on long term. His bundle pacing (HBP) is a physiological alternative to RVP. Observational studies have demonstrated the feasibility of HBP but there is still very limited data about the feasibility of AVNA after HBP. Purpose To evaluate feasibility and safety of HBP followed by AVNA in patients with non-controlled atrial arrhythmia. Methods We included in three hospitals between september 2017 and december 2019 all patients who underwent AVNA for non-controlled atrial arrhythmia after permanent His bundle pacing. No back-up right ventricular lead was implanted. AVNA procedures were performed with 8 mm-tip ablation catheter. Acute HBP threshold increase during AVNA was defined as a threshold elevation >1V. His bundle capture (HBC) thresholds were recorded at 3 months follow-up. Results AVNA after HBP lead implantation was performed in 45 patients. HBP and AVNA were performed simultaneously during the same procedure in 10. AVNA was successful in 32 of 45 patients (71%). Modulation of the AV node conduction was obtained in 7 patients (16%). The mean procedure duration was 42±24min, and mean fluoroscopy duration was 6.4±8min. A mean number of 7.7±9.9 RF applications (347±483 sec) were delivered to obtain complete / incomplete AV block. Acute HBC threshold increase occurred in 8 patients (18%) with return to baseline value at day 1 in 5 patients. There was no lead dislodgment during the AVNA procedures. Mean HBC threshold at implant was 1.26±[email protected] and slightly increased at 3 months follow-up (1.34±[email protected]). AV node re-conduction was observed in 5 patients (16% of the successful procedures) with a second successful ablation procedure in 4 patients. No ventricular lead revision was required during the follow-up period. The baseline native QRS duration was 102±21 ms and the paced QRS duration was 107±18 ms. Conclusion AVNA combined with HBP for non-controlled atrial arrhythmia is feasible and does not compromise HBC but seems technically difficult with significant AV nodal re-conduction rate. The presence of a back-up right ventricular lead could have changed our results and therefore would require further evaluation. Unipolar HBP after AV node ablation Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Download Full-text

Activation pattern during his pacing: how close are we to normal physiology?

European Heart Journal ◽

10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0804 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽

Author(s):

O Yasin ◽

V Vaidya ◽

J Tri ◽

M Van Zyl ◽

A Ladejobi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Sinus Rhythm ◽

Left Ventricular ◽

Conduction System ◽

Funding Source ◽

Activation Pattern ◽

His Bundle ◽

His Bundle Pacing ◽

Surface Ecg ◽

Qrs Duration ◽

The Right

Abstract Background His bundle pacing aims to mimic the activation pattern of normal conduction to maintain ventricular synchrony. However, selective His capture can be challenging, and the activation sequence during His pacing may not replicate normal conduction. Purpose Compare the right ventricular (RV) and left ventricular (LV) activation pattern in sinus rhythm and His bundle pacing. Methods Baseline LV and RV map was created in sinus rhythm using Rhythmia mapping system (Boston Scientific Corporation) in canine animal model. Medtronic 3830 lead was placed near the bundle of His under fluoroscopic, intracardiac echocardiogram, and electroanatomic guidance. Conduction system capture was confirmed by observing a QRS duration <120ms and an isoelectric segment between pacing artifact and QRS on surface ECG. Repeat LV and RV activation map was obtained during His pacing. Average QRS, HV and pacing to V intervals were calculated with standard deviation. Results Mapping was performed successfully in four animals. At baseline, the average QRS duration was 44±2.6ms and HV interval was 32±4.2ms. Earliest site of myocardial activation was in the mid-septal LV region. The earliest RV myocardial activation was also at the septum closer to the apex, but later than the LV (Figure1A). With His pacing, the average QRS duration was 70±17.0ms and the average stim to V interval was 31±8.7ms. During His pacing, the earliest site of activation was in the RV septum, with an activation pattern from base to apex in both the RV and LV. Conclusion Unlike normal physiology, the activation pattern during conduction system pacing is from base to apex with earliest site in the RV. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Public hospital(s). Main funding source(s): Mayo Clinic

Download Full-text

Non-selective and selective His bundle pacing both preserve left ventricular activation time and pattern

EP Europace ◽

10.1093/europace/euab116.379 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 23 (Supplement_3) ◽

Author(s):

A Arnold ◽

MJ Shun-Shin ◽

D Keene ◽

JP Howard ◽

J Chow ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Right Ventricular ◽

Left Ventricular ◽

Public Institution ◽

Activation Time ◽

His Bundle ◽

His Bundle Pacing ◽

Ventricular Activation ◽

Qrs Duration ◽

Left And Right ◽

The Impact

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Public Institution(s). Main funding source(s): British Heart Foundation Background: His bundle pacing can be achieved in two ways selective His bundle pacing, where the His bundle is captured alone, and non-selective His bundle pacing, where local myocardium is also captured resulting a pre-excited ECG appearance. We assessed the impact of this ventricular pre-excitation on left and right ventricular dys-synchrony. Methods We recruited patients who displayed both selective and non-selective His bundle pacing. We performed non-invasive epicardial electrical mapping to determine left and right ventricular activation times and patterns. Results In the primary analysis (n = 20, all patients), non-selective His bundle pacing did not prolong LVAT compared to select His bundle pacing by a pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 10ms (LVAT prolongation: -5.5ms, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.6 to -10.4, non-inferiority p < 0.0001). Non-selective His bundle pacing did not prolong right ventricular activation time (4.3ms, 95%CI: -4.0 to 12.8, p = 0.296) but did prolong QRS duration (22.1ms, 95%CI: 11.8 to 32.4, p = 0.0003). In patients with narrow intrinsic QRS (n = 6), non-selective His bundle pacing preserved left ventricular activation time (-2.9ms, 95%CI: -9.7 to 4.0, p = 0.331) but prolonged QRS duration (31.4ms, 95%CI: 22.0 to 40.7, p = 0.0003) and mean right ventricular activation time (16.8ms, 95%CI: -5.3 to 38.9, p = 0.108) compared to selective His bundle pacing. Activation pattern of the left ventricular surface was unchanged between selective and non-selective His bundle pacing. Non-selective His bundle pacing produced early basal right ventricular activation, which was not observed with selective His bundle pacing. Conclusions Compared to selective His bundle pacing, local myocardial capture during non-selective His bundle pacing produces right ventricular pre-excitation resulting in prolongation of QRS duration. However, non-selective His bundle pacing preserves the left ventricular activation time and pattern of selective His bundle pacing. When choosing between selective and non-selective His bundle pacing, left ventricular dyssynchrony is not an important factor. Abstract Figure: Selective vs Non-Selective HBP

Download Full-text

Acute hemodynamic effects of his bundle pacing vs. left ventricular or right ventricular apical or outflow tract pacing in patients with normal QRS duration

Heart Rhythm ◽

10.1016/j.hrthm.2005.02.026 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 2 (5) ◽

pp. S5

Author(s):

Luigi Padeletti ◽

Randy A. Lieberman ◽

Antonio Michelucci ◽

Andrea Collella ◽

Kenneth Jackson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Right Ventricular ◽

Left Ventricular ◽

Outflow Tract ◽

Hemodynamic Effects ◽

His Bundle ◽

His Bundle Pacing ◽

Qrs Duration

Download Full-text

The back-up lead in his bundle pacing: evolution over the years

European Heart Journal ◽

10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0779 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽

Author(s):

F Zanon ◽

L Marcantoni ◽

G Pastore ◽

E Baracca ◽

C Picariello ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Atrial Fibrillation ◽

Sinus Node ◽

Rapid Reduction ◽

His Bundle ◽

His Bundle Pacing ◽

Conduction Disturbances ◽

Node Disease ◽

Qrs Duration ◽

Fixed Curve ◽

Lead Fixation

Abstract Background His bundle pacing (HBP) can be affected by high thresholds and low sensing. Thus, in selected patients including a back-up lead is advisable. Objective Single-centre retrospective analysis of a large HBP experience, focusing on the back-up lead utilization over the years. Methods 677 pts (76±8 years; 433 males) were implanted with HBP from 2004 to 2019 July. The pts received S-HBP (67%) or NS-HBP by the 3830 lead. The pacing indications were AV block 54%, sinus node disease 17%, slow atrial fibrillation 23%, heart failure 6%. Ischemic cardiopathy was found in 26%; hypertension in 83%, diabetes in28% pts. Baseline QRS duration was 123±32 ms and EF 56±12%. Results 266 (39%) pts received the back-up lead. In sinus rhythm we implanted 3-chamber PM (His lead:LV port; VV delay 80 ms: His pulses and apical pacing during the refractory period). 30 pts (11%) received a particular type of 3-chamber PM which provides back-up pacing only if His capture fails, thus saving energy. In atrial fibrillation 2-chamber PM was implanted (His lead: atrial port, DVI). We recorded a significant decrease of back-up lead use over the years, strictly related to operators/centre experience (>70% during the first years, nearly 10% during the last year). The C315 fixed curve sheath, strongly contributed to the rapid reduction of back-up lead use thanks to better lead fixation and stability. Conclusion The back-up lead utilization is progressively decreasing. It is strictly related to the operator/centre experience. The presence of the back-up lead could strengthen the Hisian pacing reliability, potentially impacting pacing indication even in advanced conduction disturbances and saving device longevity. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Download Full-text

A network meta-analysis and systematic review of change in QRS duration after left bundle branch pacing, His bundle pacing, biventricular pacing, or right ventricular pacing in patients requiring permanent pacemaker

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/s41598-021-91610-8 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Nithi Tokavanich ◽

Narut Prasitlumkum ◽

Wimwipa Mongkonsritragoon ◽

Wisit Cheungpasitporn ◽

Charat Thongprayoon ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Right Ventricular ◽

Biventricular Pacing ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Mean Difference ◽

Ventricular Pacing ◽

Right Ventricular Pacing ◽

His Bundle ◽

His Bundle Pacing ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Qrs Duration

AbstractCardiac dyssynchrony is the proposed mechanism for pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy, which can be prevented by biventricular pacing. Left bundle branch pacing and His bundle pacing are novel interventions that imitate the natural conduction of the heart with, theoretically, less interventricular dyssynchrony. One of the surrogate markers of interventricular synchrony is QRS duration. Our study aimed to compare the change of QRS duration before and after implantation between types of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs): left bundle branch pacing versus His bundle pacing versus biventricular pacing and conventional right ventricular pacing. A literature search for studies that reported an interval change of QRS duration after CIED implantation was conducted utilizing the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. All relevant works from database inception through November 2020 were included in this analysis. A random-effects model, Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to analyze QRS duration changes (eg, electrical cardiac synchronization) across different CIED implantations. The mean study sample size, from 14 included studies, was 185 subjects. The search found 707 articles. After exclusions, 14 articles remained with 2,054 patients. The His bundle pacing intervention resulted in the most dramatic decline in QRS duration (mean difference, − 53 ms; 95% CI − 67, − 39), followed by left bundle branch pacing (mean difference, − 46 ms; 95% CI − 60, − 33), and biventricular pacing (mean difference, − 19 ms; 95% CI − 37, − 1.8), when compared to conventional right ventricle apical pacing. When compared between LBBP and HBP, showed no statistically significant wider QRS duration in LBBP with mean different 6.5 ms. (95% CI − 6.7, 21). Our network meta-analysis found that physiologic pacing has the greatest effect on QRS duration after implantation. Thus, HBP and LBBP showed no significant difference between QRS duration after implantation. Physiologic pacing interventions result in improved electrocardiography markers of cardiac synchrony, narrower QRS duration, and might lower electromechanical dyssynchrony.

Download Full-text

557 His bundle pacing: how to troubleshoot the implantation of a ventricular back-up lead

European Heart Journal Supplements ◽

10.1093/eurheartj/suab127.032 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 23 (Supplement_G) ◽

Author(s):

Giuseppe Pio Piemontese ◽

Lorenzo Bartoli ◽

Giovanni Statuto ◽

Andrea Angeletti ◽

Giulia Massaro ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Signal Amplitude ◽

Right Atrial ◽

Intrinsic Activity ◽

Variable Degree ◽

Dual Chamber ◽

His Bundle ◽

His Bundle Pacing ◽

Sensitivity Setting ◽

Qrs Duration ◽

The Right

Abstract Aims Interest in permanent His bundle pacing (HBP) as a means of both preventing pacing-induced cardiomyopathy and providing physiological resynchronization by normalization of His-Purkinje activation is constantly growing. Current devices are not specifically designed for HBP, which gives rise to programming challenges. To evaluate the critical troubleshooting HBP options in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) and variable degree of atrio-ventricular block (AVB) who receive HBP through a lead connected to the atrial port, and an additional ventricular ‘backup’. Methods and results Between December 2018 and July 2021, 156 consecutive patients with indication for pacing underwent HBP. Among these, 37 had permanent AF with documented symptomatic pauses. Fourteen of them received a dual-chamber device which was used to place a backup right ventricle (RV) lead; in this scenario, the His lead is implanted in the right atrial (RA) port, the RV lead in the RV port. Depending on the presence of an additional left ventricle (LV) lead, either a dual-chamber and a CRT device can be used. In this context, the events marked as atrial sensed (As) or paced (Ap) are indeed ventricular, so that sensing is more complex. A clinical scenario is atrial activity oversensed on the His channel (As) leading to RV dyssynchronous pacing in the ventricular safety pacing (VSP) window. A second one is intrinsic QRS undersensing causing inappropriate His pacing. The interplay of intrinsic ventricular activity (rate, signal amplitude, and slew rate on both the His and the ventricular channel) and of the HV interval may be of key importance to troubleshoot As–Vp (atrial sensed–ventricular paced) (Figure 1A) as well as Vs–Ab (ventricular sensed–atrial blanking period) sequences (Figure 1B). Changing sensitivity and sensing configuration may help to fix these issues. DVI(R) mode programming may indeed prove safer than DDD(R) in the setting of preserved intrinsic activity or in the event of intermittent His capture loss. Paced AV delay should be programmed slightly longer than H-V+QRS duration to avoid unnecessary RV pacing with pseudo-fusion (too short) (Figure 2A) and possibly R/T events (too long). Stability of H-V interval and of QRS duration must be verified at each device follow-up by decremental His pacing to ensure consistent sensitivity of the ventricular signal beyond stable His capture, that may be challenged by infra-Hisian block (Figure 2B). Conclusions Owing to the absence of HBP-specific devices, HBP shall be made safe and effective by careful troubleshooting, consisting of sensitivity setting, paced AV interval and mode programming. 557 Figure

Download Full-text

Abstract 2170: Unipolar Pace Mapping With the Medtronic SelectSecure 3830 Lead System can Accurately Locate the HIS Bundle for Permanent HIS Bundle Pacing

Circulation ◽

10.1161/circ.118.suppl_18.s_680-d ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 118 (suppl_18) ◽

Author(s):

Stanley Tung ◽

Kesava Rajagopalan ◽

Jonathan Affolter ◽

Santabhanu Chakrabarti ◽

Lynn Davenport

Keyword(s):

Ventricular Pacing ◽

Wide Spread ◽

Lead System ◽

His Bundle ◽

His Bundle Pacing ◽

Qrs Duration ◽

The Mean ◽

Right Ventricular Apical Pacing ◽

The Right ◽

Pace Mapping

Introduction: Permanent HIS Bundle pacing (HBP) is one of the most physiological ventricular pacing strategies available. Its wide spread adoption is limited due to challenges in HIS mapping, and requires femoral EP mapping to guide lead placement. We investigate whether unipolar pace mapping (PM) using the lead alone is a viable technique to locate the HB for lead deployment. Methods: Patients indicated for ventricular pacing were approached for HBP. An active fixation lead (SelectSecure®3830, Medtronic) inserted through its deflectable sheath was advanced to the right atrium via left pectoral approach.The cathode tip was positioned just outside the tip of the sheath. Unipolar PM was applied at 5V/0.5ms along the tricuspid septal annulus in anterior posterior direction. At the location with 12/12 ECG match to intrinsic QRS, and with pace to QRS delay >30ms, the lead was fixed. Unipolar sensing for HB electrogram was performed with the Medtronic 2090 analyzer (unfiltered, variable gain, sweep speed 50mm/sec). HBP implant thresholds, HB lead implant and fluoroscopy times, intrinsic and paced HV intervals, pre and post QRS and PR intervals were collected. Paired Student t -test was used for analysis. Results: 22 patients (16 male, mean age 69 yrs) underwent HBP. 19 patients had successful HBP, with 3 patients having para-Hisian septal pacing. The mean HBP implants threshold, HB lead implant and fluoroscopy times were 1.67±44V/0.6ms, 43±26min, and 13±12min respectively. The mean intrinsic and paced HV intervals were 60 and 44 ms respectively. After HBP, the QRS duration decreased from 160±44 to 132±43ms (p<0.01). HBP corrected one RBBB, one LBBB, and three right ventricular apical pacing complexes to normal (<120ms) and accounted for the shorter post HBP mean QRS duration. 8 patients presented with PR intervals ≥200msec and had their PR interval narrowed from a mean of 326±141 to 174±21ms (p<0.05). Conclusions: Unipolar PM of the His bundle using the Medtronic SelectSecure® lead system alone can accurately locate the HB for HBP with acceptable implant time and pacing thresholds. HBP also has the potential value of AVN and ventricular electrical resynchronization benefit. More data with longer-term follow up are needed before considering wide spread adoption.

Download Full-text