Background: The effect of left ventricular septal myocardial pacing (LVSP) and left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) on ventricular synchrony and left ventricular (LV) hemodynamic status is poorly understood.
Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of LVSP and LBBP vs biventricular pacing (BVP) on ventricular electrical synchrony and hemodynamic status in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients.
Methods: In cardiac resynchronization therapy candidates with LV conduction disease, ventricular synchrony was assessed by measuring QRS duration (QRSd) and using ultra-high-frequency electrocardiography. LV electrical dyssynchrony was assessed as the difference between the first activation in leads V to V to the last from leads V to V. LV hemodynamic status was estimated using invasive systolic blood pressure measurement during multiple transitions between LBBP, LVSP, and BVP.
Results: A total of 35 patients with a mean LV ejection fraction of 29% and a mean QRSd of 168 ± 24 ms were included. Thirteen had ischemic cardiomyopathy. QRSd during BVP, LVSP, and LBBP was the same, but LBBP provided shorter LV electrical dyssynchrony than BVP (-10 ms; 95% CI: -16 to -4 ms; P = 0.001); the difference between LVSP and BVP was not significant (-5 ms; 95% CI: -12 to 1 ms; P = 0.10). LBBP was associated with higher systolic blood pressure than BVP (4%; 95% CI: 2%-5%; P < 0.001), whereas LVSP was not (1%; 95% CI: 0%-2%; P = 0.10). Hemodynamic differences during LBBP and LVSP vs BVP were more pronounced in nonischemic than ischemic patients.
Conclusions: Ultra-high-frequency electrocardiography allowed the documentation of differences in LV synchrony between LBBP, LVSP, and BVP, which were not observed by measuring QRSd. LVSP provided the same LV synchrony and hemodynamic status as BVP, while LBBP was better than BVP in both.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2024.04.022 | DOI Listing |
JACC Clin Electrophysiol
November 2024
Geisinger Heart Institute, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, USA.
Background: Continuous deep septal pacing and signal recording during implantation of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) lead enables to monitor beat-to-beat changes of electrocardiogram (ECG) and myocardial current of injury (COI) as the lead crosses the septum.
Objectives: This study aimed to characterize patterns of continuous QRS, ST-T, and COI change for monitoring of the lead depth and instantaneous determination of the obtained capture type (LBBP vs left ventricular septal pacing [LVSP]).
Methods: The ECG and COI during lead implantation were scrutinized for sudden changes of V R-wave peak time, V initial and terminal R-wave amplitude, V-V R-wave amplitude, repolarization pattern and S-wave amplitude in I, V-V, and COI drop.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol
December 2024
Department of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University Medical Center+ (MUMC+), Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Introduction: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) comprises pacing at the left ventricular septum (LVSP) or left bundle branch (LBBP). The aim of the present study was to investigate the differences in ventricular electrical heterogeneity between LVSP, LBBP, right ventricular pacing (RVP) and intrinsic conduction with different dyssynchrony measures using the ECG, vectorcardiograpy, ECG belt, and Ultrahigh frequency (UHF-)ECG.
Methods: Thirty-seven patients with a pacemaker indication for bradycardia or cardiac resynchronization therapy underwent LBBAP implantation.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol
August 2024
Department of Cardiology, The First People's Hospital of Yunnan Province, The Affiliated Hospital of Kunming University of Science and Technology, 157 Jinbi Road, 650032, Kunming, Yunnan Province, People's Republic of China.
Background: Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a feasible and effective physiological pacing technique. The QRS morphology of left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) is similar to that of LBBP. The ventricular activation pattern of LBBP is well-known, whereas the pattern of LVSP still needs further investigation.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Clin Med
July 2024
Ordensklinikum Linz Elisabethinen, Fadingerstraße 1, 4020 Linz, Austria.
The current gold standard in device therapy for advanced heart failure (HF), which has been firmly established in HF management for more than 25 years, is classical biventricular pacing (BiV-CRT). In the last decade, a new pacing modality called conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as a variant for advanced cardiac device therapy. It provides pacing with preserved intrinsic cardiac activation by direct stimulation of the specific cardiac conduction system.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJACC Clin Electrophysiol
October 2024
Department of Cardiology, The Cardiac Arrhythmia Center, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, National Clinical Research Center of Cardiovascular Diseases, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address:
Background: Left bundle branch area pacing includes left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP), which is effective in patients with dyssynchronous heart failure (DHF). However, the basic mechanisms are unknown.
Objectives: This study aimed to compare LBBP with LVSP and explore potential mechanisms underlying the better clinical outcomes of LBBP.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!