A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Pacing system analyzers to guide conduction system pacing implantation procedures: A comparison study of intracardiac and surface signals with an electrophysiology recording system. | LitMetric

Background: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) needs confirmation of left conduction system capture assessed by testing of different electrical parameters. Guidelines recommend the use of an electrophysiology recording system (EP-RS) to guide conduction system pacing procedures. However, some experienced centers perform LBBAP procedures without an EP-RS.

Objective: We aimed to assess whether LBBAP criteria can be measured by the signals provided by the pacing system analyzers (PSAs) as a surrogate for the EP-RS to simplify and universalize the technique.

Methods: This was an observational, prospective, multicenter study assessing the current LBBAP criteria using the PSA compared with the EP-RS during conduction system pacing procedures.

Results: A consecutive 108 patients were included. Baseline QRS duration was 130 ± 29 ms in the EP-RS vs 128 ± 29 ms in the PSA (P = .7). An initial W morphology in V was noted in 88% of patients with the EP-RS vs 86% of patients with the PSA (P = .7) during unipolar pacing. The QRS duration (122 ± 17 ms vs 123 ± 19 ms; P = .7), the R-wave peak time interval in V (80 ± 13 ms vs 79 ± 14 ms (P = .9), and the V-V interpeak interval (39 ± 16 ms vs 38 ± 17 ms (P = .7) were superimposable in the EP-RS compared with the PSA. Pearson coefficients for the last 2 criteria were 0.85 (P < .0001) and 0.94 (P < .0001), respectively. According to the current criteria, 91.5% of patients received a successful LBBAP implant using the EP-RS. Based on the PSA measurements, 96.6% of these patients met LBBAP criteria.

Conclusion: Criteria for LBBAP can be assessed by PSAs with high accuracy. These results provide the basis for the usefulness of the PSA to guide LBBAP procedures.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.12.030DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

conduction system
16
system pacing
12
pacing system
8
system analyzers
8
guide conduction
8
electrophysiology recording
8
recording system
8
lbbap
8
lbbap procedures
8
lbbap criteria
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!