Tracking Down the Anatomy of the Left Bundle Branch to Optimize Left Bundle Branch Pacing

A new dimension in cardiac imaging: Three-dimensional exploration of the atrioventricular conduction axis with hierarchical phase-contrast tomography

Much of our understanding of the atrioventricular conduction axis has been derived from early 20th-century histologic investigations. These studies, although foundational, are constrained by their 2-dimensional representation of complex 3-dimensional anatomy. The variability in the course of the atrioventricular conduction axis, and its relationship to surrounding cardiac structures, necessitates a more advanced imaging approach. Using hierarchical phase-contrast tomography of an autopsied heart specimen with cellular resolution, this review provides a contemporary understanding of the atrioventricular conduction axis. By correlating these findings with 3-dimensional computed tomographic reconstructions in living patients, we offer clinicians the insights needed accurately to predict the location of the atrioventricular conduction axis. This novel approach overcomes the inherent limitations of 2-dimensional histology, enhancing our ability to understand and visualize the intricate relationships of the conduction axis within the heart.

Electrocardiographic predictors of clinical outcomes in nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients with left bundle branch area pacing cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

Paced QRS morphology may vary during left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) per the pacing location. It remains unclear whether electrocardiographic changes observed during LBBAP can predict clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess correlation between characteristics of paced QRS on the electrocardiogram and clinical outcomes in heart failure patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy.

METHODS

Of 79 consecutive heart failure patients receiving LBBAP, 59 patients were included in this prospective study after exclusions. LBBAP was performed using Medtronic 3830 lead. Patients were assigned to various groups on the basis of paced QRS morphology in lead V1 (qR and Qr), QRS axis (normal, left, or right), and V6 R-wave peak time (RWPT, ≤80 ms or >80 ms) to compare echocardiographic outcomes.

RESULTS

RWPT was significantly shorter (75.7 ± 17.5 ms vs 85.3 ± 11.3 ms; P = .014), transition during threshold testing was more commonly observed (81.5% vs 53%; P = .02), and improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was significantly greater in the qR group (21.4% ± 6.4% vs 16.4% ± 8.3%; P = .013) compared with the Qr group. RWPT or LVEF did not differ in patients with different paced QRS axis (P > .05). Whereas qR morphology and presence of transition during threshold testing independently predicted LVEF improvement, RWPT lacked predictive value. Nonresponders had greater incidence of loss of R' (P = .009) and prolonged RWPT (P = .003) on follow-up compared with average responders and superresponders.

CONCLUSION

Paced qR morphology and transition during threshold testing predicted greater improvement in LVEF, whereas RWPT lacked predictive value. Loss of terminal R in lead V1 and prolongation of RWPT on follow-up prognosticated nonresponse to LBBAP.

Current Role of Conduction System Pacing in Patients Requiring Permanent Pacing

His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) are novel methods of pacing directly pacing the cardiac conduction system. HBP while developed more than two decades ago, only recently moved into the clinical mainstream. In contrast to conventional cardiac pacing, conduction system pacing including HBP and LBBP utilizes the native electrical system of the heart to rapidly disseminate the electrical impulse and generate a more synchronous ventricular contraction. Widespread adoption of conduction system pacing has resulted in a wealth of observational data, registries, and some early randomized controlled clinical trials. While much remains to be learned about conduction system pacing and its role in electrophysiology, data available thus far is very promising. In this review of conduction system pacing, the authors review the emergence of conduction system pacing and its contemporary role in patients requiring permanent cardiac pacing.

Clinical impact and predictors of periprocedural myocardial injury among patients undergoing left bundle branch area pacing

BACKGROUND

The clinical impact of Periprocedural myocardial injury (PMI) in patients undergoing permanent pacemaker implantation with Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing (LBBAP) is unknown.

METHODS

130 patients undergoing LBBAP from January 2020 to June 2021 and completing 12 months follow up were enrolled to assess the impact of PMI on composite clinical outcome (CCO) defined as any of the following: all-cause death, hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and ventricular arrhythmias (VAs). High sensitivity Troponin T (HsTnT) was measured up to 24-h after intervention to identify the peak HsTnT values. PMI was defined as increased peak HsTnT values at least > 99th percentile of the upper reference limit (URL: 15 pg/ml) in patients with normal baseline values.

RESULTS

PMI occurred in 72 of 130 patients (55%). ROC analysis yielded a post-procedural peak HsTnT cutoff of fourfold the URL for predicting the CCO (AUC: 0.692; p = 0.023; sensitivity 73% and specificity 71%). Of the enrolled patients, 20% (n = 26) had peak HsTnT > fourfold the URL. Patients with peak HsTnT > fourfold the URL exhibited a higher incidence of the CCO than patients with peak HsTnT ≤ fourfold the URL (31% vs. 10%; p = 0.005), driven by more frequent hospitalizations for ACS (15% vs. 3%; p = 0.010). Multiple (> 2) lead repositions attempts, the use of septography and stylet-driven leads were independent predictors of higher risk of PMI with peak HsTnT > fourfold the URL.

CONCLUSIONS

PMI seems common among patients undergoing LBBAP and may be associated with an increased risk of clinical outcomes in case of more pronounced (peak HsTnT > fourfold the URL) myocardial damage occurring during the procedure.

Exploring heart dissection techniques for enhancing anatomical education: a pilot study to replicate transthoracic echocardiography

PURPOSE

For novice learners, converting two-dimensional (2D) images of echocardiography to three-dimensional (3D) cardiac structures is deemed challenging. This study aimed to develop an accurate dissection method of the heart to reproduce the transthoracic echocardiographic views on cadavers and elucidate new educational methods in human anatomy dissection courses.

METHODS

A total of 18 hearts were used in this study. After reflecting the anterior thoracic wall inferiorly, the hearts were excised from embalmed cadavers. Thereafter, three landmarks were set on the heart for each plane of the incision, and the hearts were incised to observe the three different echocardiographic views, which include the apical four-chamber view (A4C), parasternal long axis (PLAX) view, and parasternal short axis (PSAX) view at the papillary muscle level. If all structures for observation during routine echocardiography are clearly observed in each view, a successful incision is considered. All procedures and incisions were performed by the medical students. After a successful incision, hearts were returned to the original position in the pericardial sac for further observation.

RESULTS

The success rates of incision for each view were 83.3% (5/6 success cases), 83.3% (5/6 success cases), and 66.7% (4/6 success cases) in the A4C view, PLAX view, and PSAX view at the papillary muscle level, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This dissection method could probably be employed to reproduce transthoracic echocardiographic views on cadaveric hearts, which is beneficial for novice learners for a deeper understanding of the anatomy.

Left bundle branch pacing better preserves ventricular mechanical synchrony than right ventricular pacing: a two-centre study

AIMS

Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) has been shown to better maintain electrical synchrony compared with right ventricular pacing (RVP), but little is known about its impact on mechanical synchrony. This study investigates whether LBBP better preserves left ventricular (LV) mechanical synchronicity and function compared with RVP.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Sixty patients with pacing indication for bradycardia were included: LBBP (n = 31) and RVP (n = 29). Echocardiography was performed before and shortly after pacemaker implantation and at 1-year follow-up. The lateral wall-septal wall (LW-SW) work difference was used as a measure of mechanical dyssynchrony. Septal flash, apical rocking, and septal strain patterns were also assessed. At baseline, LW-SW work difference was small and similar in two groups. SW was markedly decreased, while LW work remained mostly unchanged in RVP, resulting in a larger LW-SW work difference compared with LBBP (1253 ± 687 mmHg·% vs. 439 ± 408 mmHg·%, P < 0.01) at last follow-up. In addition, RVP more often induced septal flash or apical rocking and resulted in more advanced strain patterns compared with LBBP. At 1 year follow-up, LV ejection fraction (EF) and global longitudinal strain (GLS) were more decreased in RVP compared with LBBP (ΔLVEF: -7.4 ± 7.0% vs. 0.3 ± 4.1%; ΔLVGLS: -4.8 ± 4.0% vs. -1.4 ± 2.5%, both P < 0.01). In addition, ΔLW-SW work difference was independently correlated with LV adverse remodelling (r = 0.42, P < 0.01) and LV dysfunction (ΔLVEF: r = -0.61, P < 0.01 and ΔLVGLS: r = -0.38, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

LBBP causes less LV mechanical dyssynchrony than RVP as it preserves a more physiologic electrical conduction. As a consequence, LBBP appears to preserve LV function better than RVP.

Anatomy of the Ventricular Outflow Tracts: An Electrophysiology Perspective

Outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias are the most common type of idiopathic ventricular arrhythmia. A systematic understanding of the outflow tract anatomy improves procedural efficacy and enables electrophysiologists to anticipate and prevent complications. This review emphasizes the three-dimensional spatial relationships between the ventricular outflow tracts using seven anatomical principles. In turn, each principle is elaborated on from a clinical perspective relevant for the practicing electrophysiologist. The developmental anatomy of the outflow tracts is also discussed and reinforced with a clinical case.

QRS axis and polarity in the inferior leads during left bundle branch pacing: Novel criteria in the search for better results

BACKGROUND

Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) may be achieved in various anatomical sites within the interventricular septum (IVS), thus influencing paced QRS duration (QRSd).The purpose of this study was to determine whether paced QRS axis (QRSâ) and predominant polarity in inferior leads could be associated with a shorter paced QRSd.

METHODS

We analyzed paced QRSd, QRSâ, polarity in inferior leads, and IVS thickness in patients referred for LBBP. Three paced morphology patterns in the inferior leads were considered: All positive (P), all negative (N) and intermediate (combination of isoelectric, positive, and negative complexes, (I). Patients were divided into two groups according to a paced QRSd < 120 or ≥ 120 ms.

RESULTS

A total of 125 patients were included (age 76 ± 10 years, 46% female). Mean baseline QRSâ was 8 ± 37°. Paced QRSd was significantly shorter as compared to baseline (120 ± 10 vs. 127 ± 33 ms; p = .017) and significantly different according to paced QRS morphology pattern in the inferior leads (P 49%, 119 ± 9; N 30%, 126 ± 12; I 21%; 113 ± 10 ms; p < .001) or paced QRSâ (Normal 59%, 116 ± 1; Right 6%, 129 ± 1; Left 35%, 124 ± 11 ms; p < .001). On multivariate analysis, a QRSâ > -30°(OR 5.79 [2.40-13.93; 95% CI] p = .001), an Intermediate pattern in inferior leads (OR 3.00 [1.67-8.43; 95% CI] p = .037), and an IVS thickness ≤ 10 mm (OR 2.59 [1.10-6.10; 95% CI]; p = .029) were significantly associated with a paced QRSd < 120 ms.

CONCLUSIONS

During LBBP, a QRSâ > -30° and intermediate final polarity in inferior leads are associated with a shorter paced QRSd.

Left septal fascicular block: Evidence, causes, and diagnostic criteria

The existence of a tetrafascicular intraventricular conduction system is widely accepted by researchers. In this review, we have updated the criteria for left septal fascicular block (LSFB) and the differential diagnosis of prominent anterior QRS forces. More and more evidence points to the fact that the main cause of LSFB is critical proximal stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery before its first septal perforator branch. The most important characteristic of LSFB that has been incorporated in the corresponding diagnostic electrocardiographic criteria is its transient/intermittent nature mostly observed in clinical scenarios of acute (ie, acute coronary syndrome including vasospastic angina) or chronic (ie, exercise-induced ischemia) ischemic coronary artery disease. In addition, the phenomenon proved to be phase 4 bradycardia rate dependent and induced by early atrial extrastimulus. Finally, we believe that intermittent LSFB has the same clinical significance as "Wellens syndrome" and the "de Winter pattern" in the acute coronary syndrome scenario.

Implant, assessment, and management of conduction system pacing

His bundle pacing and left bundle branch pacing, together referred to as conduction system pacing, have (re)gained considerable interest over the past years as it has the potential to preserve and/or restore a more physiological ventricular activation when compared with right ventricular pacing and may serve as an alternative for cardiac resynchronization therapy. This review manuscript dives deeper into the implantation techniques and the relevant anatomy of the conduction system for both pacing strategies. Furthermore, the manuscript elaborates on better understanding of conduction system capture with its various capture patterns, its potential complications as well as appropriate follow-up care. Finally, the limitations and its impact on clinical care for both His bundle pacing and left bundle branch pacing are being discussed.

Approach to Left Bundle Branch Pacing

Cardiac pacing refers to the implantation tool serving as a treatment modality for various indications, the most common of which is symptomatic bradyarrhythmia. Left bundle branch pacing has been noted in the literature to be safer than biventricular pacing or His-bundle pacing in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and heart failure, thereby becoming the focus of further research on cardiac pacing. A review of the literature was conducted using a combination of keywords, including "Left Bundle Branch Block," "Procedural techniques," "Left Bundle Capture," and "Complications." The following factors have been investigated as key criteria for direct capture: paced QRS morphology, peak left ventricular activation time, left bundle potential, nonselective and selective left bundle capture, and programmed deep septal stimulation protocol. In addition, complications of LBBP, inclusive of septal perforation, thromboembolism, right bundle branch injury, septal artery injury, lead dislodgement, lead fracture, and lead extraction, have also been elaborated on. Despite clinical implications based on clinical research comparing the use of LBBP with other forms such as right ventricular apex pacing, His-bundle pacing, biventricular pacing, and left ventricular septal pacing, a paucity in the literature on long-term effects and efficacy has been noted. LBBP can thus be considered to have a promising future in patients requiring cardiac pacing, assuming that additional research on clinical outcomes and the limitation of significant complications such as thromboembolism can be established.

Conduction System Pacing Today and Tomorrow

Conduction system pacing (CSP) encompassing His bundle (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is gaining increasing attention in the electrophysiology community. These relatively novel physiological pacing modalities have the potential to outperform conventional pacing approaches with respect to clinical endpoints, although data are currently still limited. While HBP represents the most physiological form of cardiac stimulation, success rates, bundle branch correction, and electrical lead performance over time remain a concern. LBBAP systems may overcome these limitations. In this review article, we provide a comprehensive overview of the current evidence, implantation technique, device programming, and follow-up considerations concerning CSP systems. Moreover, we discuss ongoing technical developments and future perspectives of CSP.

Anatomy for right ventricular lead implantation

To understand the position of a pacing lead in the right ventricle and to correctly interpret fluoroscopy and intracardiac signals, good anatomical knowledge is required. The right ventricle can be separated into an inlet, an outlet, and an apical compartment. The inlet and outlet are separated by the septomarginal trabeculae, while the apex is situated below the moderator band. A lead position in the right ventricular apex is less desirable, last but not least due to the thin myocardial wall. Many leads supposed to be implanted in the apex are in fact fixed rather within the trabeculae in the inlet, which are sometimes difficult to pass. In the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT), the free wall is easier to reach than the septal due to the fact that the RVOT wraps around the septum. A mid-septal position close to the moderator band is relatively simple to achieve and due to the vicinity of the right bundle branch may produce a narrower paced QRS complex. Special and detailed knowledge is necessary for His bundle and left bundle branch pacing.

His Bundle Pacing: My Experience, Tricks, and Tips

His Bundle Pacing (HBP) is a form of physiologic pacing achieved through implantation of a pacing electrode into the His bundle. HBP began 20 years ago without any dedicated tools. As specific tools became available HBP quickly spread and proved to be a viable alternative to traditional right ventricle pacing. HBP is reliable and effective in preserving the physiologic ventricular synchrony with clinical benefits particularly evident when a high percentage of pacing is required. Unipolar signals from the lead tip guide the implant. 3D electroanatomical mapping could further assist the procedure.

Computerized tomography image correlation of His bundle/deep septal pacing location and outcomes: an analysis from the Canberra HIs bundle/deep septal Pacing Study (CHIPS)

Background

Localisation of the conduction system under fluoroscopy is not easy and the ideal location of the pacing leads in physiological pacing is still being debated.

Objective

The primary aim was to assess the lead locations using cardiac CT scan. Secondary aims were clinical outcomes including success and safety of the procedure and lead performance.

Methods

Of the 100 consecutive patients who received physiological pacing, 34 patients underwent follow-up cardiac CT scan. The four different types of pacing were identified as His bundle (HBP), para-Hisian, left bundle branch (LBBP), and deep septal pacing.

Results

Most patients had successful HBP via the right atrium (RA) (87.5%) as compared to the right ventricle (RV) (12.5%). Lower thresholds were observed when leads were placed within 2 mm of the junction of the membranous and muscular ventricular septum. Unlike HBP, LBBP was possible at a wide region of the septum and selective capture of individual fascicles was feasible. LBBP showed deeper penetration of leads into the septum, as compared to deep septal pacing (70% vs. 45%). Approximately, 80% of patients did not have an intra-ventricular portion of the membranous septum.

Conclusions

The anterior part of the atrio-ventricular (AV) septum at the junction between the membranous and muscular septum via RA appeared to be the best target to successfully pace His bundle. LBBP was possible at a wide region of the septum and selective capture of individual fascicle was feasible. Adequate depth of penetration of lead was very important to capture the left bundle.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10840-022-01133-z.

Conduction System Pacing after Septal Myectomy: Obstruction of Just-His

ovement is a community This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The Atrioventricular Conduction Axis and its Implications for Permanent Pacing

Extensive knowledge of the anatomy of the atrioventricular conduction axis, and its branches, is key to the success of permanent physiological pacing, either by capturing the His bundle, the left bundle branch or the adjacent septal regions. The inter-individual variability of the axis plays an important role in underscoring the technical difficulties known to exist in achieving a stable position of the stimulating leads. In this review, the key anatomical features of the location of the axis relative to the triangle of Koch, the aortic root, the inferior pyramidal space and the inferoseptal recess are summarised. In keeping with the increasing number of implants aimed at targeting the environs of the left bundle branch, an extensive review of the known variability in the pattern of ramification of the left bundle branch from the axis is included. This permits the authors to summarise in a pragmatic fashion the most relevant aspects to be taken into account when seeking to successfully deploy a permanent pacing lead.

Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing: Implant Technique, Definitions, Outcomes, and Complications

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged during the last few years as the cornerstone of physiological pacing. Two different CSP modalities have been described so far: His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP). This review will be focused on the description of LBBAP technique, definitions, outcomes, and complications.

RECENT FINDINGS

Large observational studies have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of LBBAP in different scenarios. LBBAP has been associated with excellent pacing electrical parameters (pacing threshold and R wave sensing) and low complication rates including lead revision < 1%. In patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) indication, LBBAP has shown significant improvement of functional class and left ventricular ejection fraction during short-term follow-up. LBBAP is a relatively new CSP modality showing excellent results for patients with conventional bradycardia pacing indications and promising expectations about its potential role for CRT.