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

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

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

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

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

Circulation ◽  
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.

His-bundle pacing in CHF-patients with narrow QRS and chronic AF – an upgrade from single-chamber to dual-chamber ICD

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Ciesielski ◽  
A Slawuta ◽  
A Zabek ◽  
K Boczar ◽  
B Malecka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Clinical Status ◽  
Chronic Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Dual Chamber ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Single Chamber ◽  
His Bundle ◽  
His Bundle Pacing ◽  
Short Period

Abstract   A single-chamber ICD is a standard method for primary SCD prophylaxis. In patients with chronic atrial fibrillation it does not contribute to the regularization of heart rate, which is crucial for proper treatment. Moreover, to avoid the deleterious effect of right ventricular pacing only minority of the patients with single chamber ICD get the appropriate, recommended dose of beta-blockers. The aim of our study was to assess the efficacy of direct His-bundle pacing in a population of patients with congestive heart failure and chronic atrial fibrillation using upgrade from single chamber to dual-chamber ICD and atrial channel to perform the His-bundle pacing Methods The study population included 39 patients (37 men, 2 women) aged 67.2±9.3 years, with CHF and chronic AF implanted primarily with single chamber ICD with established pharmacotherapy and stable clinical status. Results The echocardiography measurements at baseline and during follow-up were presented in the table: During short period (3–6 months) of follow-up the mean values of EF and LV dimensions significantly improved. This was also accompanied by functional status improvement. Conclusions His-bundle-based pacing in CHF-chronic AF patients contributes to significant echocardiographic and clinical improvement. Standard single-chamber ICD implantation in CHF-chronic AF patients yields only SCD prevention without influence on remodeling process. The physiological pacing contributes to better pharmacotherapy. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

P1239His-bundle pacing in CHF-patients with narrow QRS and chronic AF using dual-chamber ICD

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Slawuta ◽  
K Boczar ◽  
A Zabek ◽  
A Ciesielski ◽  
J Hiczkiewicz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Congestive Heart Failure ◽  
Dual Chamber ◽  
His Bundle ◽  
His Bundle Pacing ◽  
Narrow Qrs ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Abstract The heart rate regularization is crucial for proper treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure. The standard resynchronization can be applied, but in patients with narrow QRS this procedure is of no use. The aim of our study is to assess the efficacy of direct His-bundle pacing in patients with congestive heart failure and chronic atrial fibrillation using dual chamber ICD implanted for prevention of sudden cardiac death. Methods The study population included 78 patients with CHF and chronic AF: group A - 56 pts treated with direct His-bundle pacing using atrial port of dual chamber ICD and group B - 22 patients implanted with single chamber ICD as recommended by the guidelines. The patients in group B constituting clinical controls were derived from the Heart Failure Outpatients Clinic with established clinical status and pharmacotherapy. Results The demographic data, clinical characteristics and echocardiography measurements at baseline and during follow-up were presented in the table: Table 1 Group A Group B P value Age (years) 69.7±6.9 66.7±11.3 n.s. Sex (% of male sex) 84.0 86.4 n.s. Ventricular pacing (%) – 46.3±31.2 – His-bundle pacing (%) 81.7±9.2 – – pre post pre post pre vs. post LVEDD (mm) 66.9±4.9 59.9±4.7 64.8±8.0 64.7±8.1 <0.01 n.s. EF (%) 29.6±3.8 43.6±5.9 28.1±6.1 28.8±7.3 <0.01 n.s. NYHA class 2.7±0.6 1.4±0.6 2.5±0.6 2.0±0.2 <0.05 n.s. B-blocker dose (metoprolol equivalent dose) 104.6±41.6 214.3±82.6 78.3±56.6 103.1±49.2 <0.001 <0.05 During 12-months of follow-up the mean values of NYHA functional class, EF and LV dimensions did not change in group B but significantly improved in group A. The physiological His-bundle based pacing enabled optimal beta-blocker dosing. The studied groups had no tachyarrhythmia at baseline so the presumable atrial fibrillation-related harm depends on the rhythm irregularity. Conclusions His-bundle-based pacing in CHF-chronic AF patients contributes to significant echocardiographic and clinical improvement. Standard single-chamber ICD implantation in CHF-chronic AF patients yields only SCD prevention without influence on remodeling process. The CHF-patients with narrow QRS and chronic AF benefit from substantially higher beta-blockade which can be instituted in His-bundle pacing group.

scholarly journals Permanent His-bundle pacing from the right atrium in patients with prosthetic tricuspid valve

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 244-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie C. Fuentes Rojas ◽  
Paul A. Schurmann ◽  
Moisés Rodríguez-Mañero ◽  
Daniel Lustgarten ◽  
Miguel Valderrábano
Keyword(s):  
Tricuspid Valve ◽  
Right Atrium ◽  
His Bundle ◽  
His Bundle Pacing ◽  
The Right

6119Correction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement induced left bundle branch block by His bundle pacing

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J De Pooter ◽  
S Calle ◽  
M Coeman ◽  
T Philipsen ◽  
P Gheeraert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Permanent Pacemaker ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
His Bundle ◽  
His Bundle Pacing ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽  
Qrs Duration

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.

scholarly journals Reversal of left bundle branch block–induced cardiomyopathy by His bundle pacing

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 030006051988418
Author(s):  
Fei Liu ◽  
Lijun Zeng ◽  
Xiaomeng Yin ◽  
Lianjun Gao ◽  
Yunlong Xia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Heart Function ◽  
Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
His Bundle ◽  
His Bundle Pacing ◽  
Temporary Pacemaker ◽  
Nonischemic Dilated Cardiomyopathy ◽  
The Right

A 61-year-old woman was referred to our institution for evaluation of severe nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and left bundle branch block (LBBB). After permanent His bundle pacing, the LBBB was immediately corrected; however, the right bundle branch was injured during the procedure. Subsequent recovery of the right bundle branch block and normalization of heart function were observed during follow-up. This case indicates that LBBB might result in the development of nonischemic cardiomyopathy and emphasizes the necessity of a temporary pacemaker during His bundle pacing for patients with LBBB.

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

Circulation ◽  
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.

scholarly journals Electrical characteristics of deep septal vs. left bundle branch (area) pacing

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
L.I.B Heckman ◽  
J Luermans ◽  
B Weijs ◽  
A.M.W Van Stipdonk ◽  
M Mafi-Rad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Interventricular Septum ◽  
Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Transverse Plane ◽  
Right Atrial ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Septal Pacing ◽  
Qrs Duration ◽  
The Right

Abstract Background/Introduction Recent studies have described transvenous left bundle branch (LBB) pacing as a new conduction system pacing strategy. However, information on effect of pacing depth within the septum and the additional effect of LBB capture is unknown. Purpose To investigate the relation of electrocardographic characteristics with transseptal LV lead implantation depth and LBB capture. Methods 20 consecutive patients referred for pacemaker implantation were enrolled. The right atrial (RA) lead was positioned according to routine practice. The LV septal pacing lead (Medtronic 3830) was transvenously positioned against the right side of the interventricular septum and advanced in small steps of 1–2mm towards the left side of the septum. At each depth in the septum 12-lead ECG's were recorded during pacing, from which vectorcardiograms (VCG) were calculated. QRS duration and QRS area were measured, the latter being the integral of the QRSarea in X, Y and Z directions. Successful LBB capture was defined as paced right bundle branch block (RBBB) morphology, stable and short stimulus to LV activation time (LVAT; R in V5) and recorded LBB potential. Differences were compared among pacing conditions using repeated measures ANOVA with Bonferroni multiple comparisons procedure applied to pairwise comparisons. Statistical significance was assumed at p&lt;0.05. Results LV septal lead implantation was successful in all patients. Left bundle branch capture was achieved in 10/20 patients (50%). Post-procedural LV pacing threshold, impedance and sensing was 0.7±0.1 V at 0.5 ms pulse width, 658±5 Ω and 13±10 mV, respectively. Compared to intrinsic rhythm, QRS duration was significantly increased by both RV septum (RVS; 124±5 vs. 161±3 ms) and LV septum pacing (LVS; 142±3 ms). QRS area increased significantly during RVS pacing as compared to intrinsic rhythm but decreased when moving from RVS to LVS to values close to intrinsic rhythm (panel A & B). LVS-pacing derived QRS area was significantly lower in patients with LBB capture (36±6 mV*ms) compared to patients without LBB capture (deep septal pacing; 46±12 mV*ms). The reduction in QRS area between RVS and LVS pacing coincided with normalization of the QRS vector in the transverse plane (panel C), which is characterized electrocardiographically by predominantly negative-to-positive inversion of the QRS complex in the precordial leads (V1-V3). Conclusions Compared to RV septal pacing, LV septal pacing restores ventricular electrical synchrony, as determined by QRS area, and normalizes the activation vector in the transverse plane to a level comparable to intrinsic rhythm. Differences in resynchronization between left bundle branch pacing and deep septal pacing are small. LBBAP restores ventricular synchrony Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

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

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 &gt;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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document