Evaluation of right ventricular pacing parameters in patients with proliferative scar

Effects of coronary artery disease in patients with permanent left bundle branch area pacing: A retrospective study

Aims

Myocardial ischemia can affect traditional right ventricular (RV) pacing parameters, but it is unclear whether coronary artery disease (CAD) impact the pacing parameters and electrophysiological characteristics of left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) as a physiological pacing representative.

Methods

Patients who underwent coronary angiography (CAG) after/before the LBBaP procedure and underwent percutaneous coronary intervention after LBBaP procedure were divided into CAD group and Non-CAD group according to visual CAG. Pacing parameters and electrophysiological characteristics were recorded at LBBaP implantation. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was implemented to evaluate the association between CAD and higher capture threshold. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to verify result stability.

Results

A total of 176 patients met inclusion criteria (115 Non-CAD patients and 61 CAD patients) with a mean age of 71.1 ± 9.0 years. Compared with the Non-CAD patients, CAD patients had the higher capture threshold (0.67 ± 0.22 V vs. 0.82 ± 0.28 V, P < 0.001) and lower R-wave amplitude (12.5 ± 4.8 mV vs. 10.1 ± 2.7 mV, P = 0.001). Moreover, CAD was independently associated with higher capture threshold (adjusted Odds ratio (OR) 3.418, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.621-7.206, P = 0.001), which was further validated through sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

Patients without CAD might have safer pacing parameters in the LBBaP procedure. Besides, CAD might be the risk factor of capture threshold increase during permanent LBBaP implantation.

Effects of long-term right ventricular apex pacing on left ventricular dyssynchrony, morphology and systolic function

BACKGROUND

Right ventricular apex (RVA) is still the most common implanted site in the world. There are a large number of RVA pacing population who have been carrying dual-chamber permanent pacemaker (PPM) over decades. Comparison of left ventricular dyssynchrony, morphology and systolic function between RVA pacing population and healthy population is unknown.

METHOD

This case-control study enrolled 61 patients suffered from complete atrioventricular block (III°AVB) for replacement of dual-chamber PPM. Then, 61 healthy controls matched with PPM patients in gender, age, follow-up duration and complications were included. The lead impedance, pacing threshold and sensing were compared between at implantation and long-term follow-up. Left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony, morphology and systolic function were compared between RVA pacing population (RVA group) and healthy population (healthy group) at implantation (baseline) and follow-up. And clarify the predictors of LV systolic function in RVA group at follow-up.

RESULTS

After 112.44 ± 34.94 months of follow-up, comparing with parameters at implantation, atrial lead impedance decreased significantly (690 ± 2397 Ω vs 613 ± 2257 Ω， p = 0.048); atrial pacing threshold has a increased trend and P-wave amplitude has a decreased trend, but there was no statistical differences; while, RVA ventricular lead threshold increased significantly (0.50 ± 0.23 V vs 0.91 ± 0.47 V， p < 0.001), impedance (902 ± 397 Ω vs 680 ± 257 Ω，p < 0.001) and R-wave amplitude (11.71 ± 9.40mv vs 7.00 ± 6.91 mv， p < 0.001) decreased significantly. Compared with healthy group, long-term RVA pacing significantly increased ventricular dyssynchrony (mean QRS duration, 156.21 ± 29.80 ms vs 97.08 ± 15.70 ms， p < 0.001), left atrium diameter (LAD, 40.61 ± 6.15 mm vs 37.49 ± 4.80 mm，p = 0.002), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD, 49.15 ± 5.93 mm vs 46.41 ± 3.80 mm，p = 0.003), left ventricular hypertrophy (LVMI, 121.86 ± 41.52 g/m2 vs 98.41 ± 25.29 g/m2，p < 0.001), significantly deteriorated degree of tricuspid regurgitation (p < 0.001), and significantly decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, 61.38 ± 8.10% vs 64.64 ± 5.85%, p = 0.012), but after long-term RVA pacing, the mean LVEF was still more than 50%. Long-term RVA group LVEF was negatively correlated with preimplantation LVMI (B = -0.055，t = -2.244，p = 0.029), LVMI at follow-up (B = -0.081，t = -3.864，p = 0.000) and tricuspid regurgitation at follow-up (B = -3.797，t = -3.599，p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, although long-term RVA pacing has significantly effects on left ventricular dyssynchrony, morphology and systolic function in III°AVB patients, the mean LVEF is still >50%. High preimplantation LVMI can predict the decline of LVEF.