Permanent His bundle pacing: shaping the future of physiological ventricular pacing

Is conduction system pacing a panacea for pacemaker therapy?

INTRODUCTION

While supported by robust evidence and decades of clinical experience, right ventricular apical pacing for bradycardia is associated with a risk of progressive left ventricular dysfunction. Cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction can result in limited electrical resynchronization due to anatomical constraints and epicardial stimulation. In both settings, directly stimulating the conduction system below the atrio-ventricular node (either the bundle of His or the left bundle branch area) has potential to overcome these limitations. Conduction system pacing has met with considerable enthusiasm in view of the more physiological electrical conduction pattern, is rapidly becoming the preferred option of pacing for bradycardia, and is gaining momentum as an alternative to conventional biventricular pacing.

AREAS COVERED

This article provides a review of the current efficacy and safety data for both people requiring treatment for bradycardia and the management of heart failure with conduction delay and discusses the possible future roles for conduction system pacing in routine clinical practice.

EXPERT OPINION

Conduction system pacing might be the holy grail of pacemaker therapy without the disadvantages of current approaches. However, hypothesis and enthusiasm are no match for robust data, demonstrating at least equivalent efficacy and safety to standard approaches.

Device therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Device therapy is a nonpharmacological approach that presents a crucial advancement for managing patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This review investigated the impact of device-based interventions and emphasized their potential for optimizing treatment for this complex patient demographic. Cardiac resynchronization therapy, augmented by atrioventricular node ablation with His-bundle pacing or left bundle-branch pacing, is effective for enhancing cardiac function and establishing atrioventricular synchrony. Cardiac contractility modulation and vagus nerve stimulation represent novel strategies for increasing myocardial contractility and adjusting the autonomic balance. Left ventricular expanders have demonstrated short-term benefits in HFpEF patients but require more investigation for long-term effectiveness and safety, especially in patients with AF. Research gaps regarding complications arising from left ventricular expander implantation need to be addressed. Device-based therapies for heart valve diseases, such as transcatheter aortic valve replacement and transcatheter edge-to-edge repair, show promise for patients with AF and HFpEF, particularly those with mitral or tricuspid regurgitation. Clinical evaluations show that these device therapies lessen AF occurrence, improve exercise tolerance, and boost left ventricular diastolic function. However, additional studies are required to perfect patient selection criteria and ascertain the long-term effectiveness and safety of these interventions. Our review underscores the significant potential of device therapy for improving the outcomes and quality of life for patients with AF and HFpEF.

Tricuspid valve disease and cardiac implantable electronic devices

The role of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)-related tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is increasingly recognized as an independent clinical entity. Hence, interventional TR treatment options continuously evolve, surgical risk assessment and peri-operative care improve the management of CIED-related TR, and the role of lead extraction is of high interest. Furthermore, novel surgical and interventional tricuspid valve treatment options are increasingly applied to patients suffering from TR associated with or related to CIEDs. This multidisciplinary review article developed with electrophysiologists, interventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, and cardiac surgeons aims to give an overview of the mechanisms of disease, diagnostics, and proposes treatment algorithms of patients suffering from TR associated with CIED lead(s) or leadless pacemakers.

Emerging Technologies in Cardiac Pacing

Cardiac pacing to treat bradyarrhythmias has evolved in recent decades. Recognition that a substantial proportion of pacemaker-dependent patients can develop heart failure due to electrical and mechanical dyssynchrony from traditional right ventricular apical pacing has led to development of more physiologic pacing methods that better mimic normal cardiac conduction and provide synchronized ventricular contraction. Conventional biventricular pacing has been shown to benefit patients with heart failure and conduction system disease but can be limited by scarring and fibrosis. His bundle pacing and left bundle branch area pacing are novel techniques that can provide more physiologic ventricular activation as an alternative to conventional or biventricular pacing. Leadless pacing has emerged as another alternative pacing technique to overcome limitations in conventional transvenous pacemaker systems. Our objective is to review the evolution of cardiac pacing and explore these new advances in pacing strategies.

Advances in cardiac pacing with leadless pacemakers and conduction system pacing

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The field of cardiac pacing has undergone significant evolution with the introduction and adoption of conduction system pacing (CSP) and leadless pacemakers (LLPMs). These innovations provide benefits over conventional pacing methods including avoiding lead related complications and achieving more physiological cardiac activation. This review critically assesses the latest advancements in CSP and LLPMs, including their benefits, challenges, and potential for future growth.

RECENT FINDINGS

CSP, especially of the left bundle branch area, enhances ventricular depolarization and cardiac mechanics. Recent studies show CSP to be favorable over traditional pacing in various patient populations, with an increase in its global adoption. Nevertheless, challenges related to lead placement and long-term maintenance persist. Meanwhile, LLPMs have emerged in response to complications from conventional pacemaker leads. Two main types, Aveir and Micra, have demonstrated improved outcomes and adoption over time. The incorporation of new technologies allows LLPMs to cater to broader patient groups, and their integration with CSP techniques offers exciting potential.

SUMMARY

The advancements in CSP and LLPMs present a transformative shift in cardiac pacing, with evidence pointing towards enhanced clinical outcomes and reduced complications. Future innovations and research are likely to further elevate the clinical impact of these technologies, ensuring improved patient care for those with conduction system disorders.

His bundle pacing success and electrical parameter stability regardless of three-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography lead localization

BACKGROUND OR PURPOSE

His bundle pacing (HBP) is the most physiological form of ventricular pacing. Few prospective studies have analyzed lead localization using imaging techniques and its relationship with electrical parameters and capture patterns. The objective of this study is to examine the correlation between electrical parameters and lead localization using three-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography (3D TTE).

METHODS

This single-center, prospective, nonrandomized clinical research study (January 2018 to June 2020) included patients with an indication of permanent pacing, in whom 3D TTE was performed to define lead localization as supravalvular or subvalvular.

RESULTS

A total of 92 patients were included: 56.5% of leads were supravalvular, and 43.5% were subvalvular, which resembles previous anatomic descriptions of autopsied hearts of His bundle localization within the triangle of Koch (ToK). R-wave sensing was higher when the His lead was localized subvalvular instead of supravalvular. His lead localization was not associated with HBP threshold or impedance differences, nor with the two different HBP patterns of capture, or with the ability of HBP to correct baseline BBB. The thresholds remained stable during follow-up visits, regardless of His lead localization. Higher R-wave sensing was observed during follow-up than at baseline, mainly in the subvalvular His leads. However, lead impedances in both positions decreased during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Lead localization in relation to the tricuspid valve did not influence the electrical performance of HBPs. Wide anatomical variations of the His bundle within the ToK explain our findings, reinforcing the idea that the technique for HBP should be fundamentally guided by electrophysiological and not anatomical parameters.

Quantitative analysis reveals influencing factors to facilitate successful anodal-ring capture in left bundle branch pacing

AIMS

Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) maintains left ventricular synchrony but induces right ventricular conduction delay (RVCD). Although anodal-ring capture (ARC) during bipolar LBBP improves RVCD, it is not achieved in all patients receiving LBBP. This study aimed to analyze the factors influencing ARC implementation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients receiving LBBP with intraoperative ARC testing were enrolled. Electrocardiographic parameters were measured, including stimulus-to-QRS duration (stim-QRSd), stimulus-to-left/right ventricular activation time (stim-LVAT/RVAT), and V6-V1 interpeak interval. The distribution of lead-tip sites was described as the corrected longitudinal and lateral distance (longit-/lat-dist). Relative angles of the LBBP lead were measured. Echocardiography in short-axis view was used to measure the intraseptal lead length. Intergroup comparisons, correlation analysis, and stepwise logistic regression were performed. In total, 105 patients were included, among which 65 (62%) patients achieved ARC at a pacing output ≤ 5.0 V/0.5 ms (average 3.1 V/0.5 ms). Anodal-ring capture further shortened the stim-QRSd by 13.1 ± 7.5 ms. Better unipolar-ring (cathodal) threshold and R-wave sensing in LBBP-ARC group indicated the critical role of ring-septum contact in ARC. Longer corrected longit-dist and shorter corrected lat-dist of lead-tip sites were positively correlated with higher success likelihood of ARC, likely due to the greater relative angle in which the lead enters the septum and consequently the longer intraseptal lead length and better ring-septum contact.

CONCLUSION

This study elucidated the factors affecting the success likelihood of LBBP-ARC. These findings improve the understanding of LBBP-ARC, providing references for future research and clinical practice.

The role of conduction system pacing in patients with atrial fibrillation

Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as a promising novel delivery method for Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy (CRT), providing an alternative to conventional biventricular epicardial (BiV) pacing in indicated patients. Despite increasing popularity and widespread uptake, CSP has rarely been specifically examined in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), a cohort which forms a significant proportion of the heart failure (HF) population. In this review, we first examine the mechanistic evidence for the importance of sinus rhythm (SR) in CSP by allowing adjustment of atrioventricular delays (AVD) to achieve the optimal electrical response, and thus, whether the efficacy of CSP may be significantly attenuated compared to conventional BiV pacing in the presence of AF. We next evaluate the largest clinical body of evidence in this field, related to patients receiving CSP following atrioventricular nodal ablation (AVNA) for AF. Finally, we discuss how future research may be designed to address the vital question of how effective CSP in AF patients is, and the potential hurdles we may face in delivering such studies.

Meta-analysis of clinical outcomes in cardiac resynchronisation therapy: His Bundle Pacing vs biventricular pacing

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Cardiac resynchronization may treat severe heart failure (HF) with pharmacological optimization, left branch block, and an ejection fraction < 35%. However, 30-40% of patients fail therapy. HBP could replace biventricular pacing (BiV). We compared the effectiveness of HBP versus BiV in HF patients.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for studies on QRS, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV), and 6-minute walk test.

RESULTS

Six publications included 774 patients (mean [± standard deviation] age: 66.9 [14.0] years; 484 (62.5%) were males; 408 [52.71%] underwent HBP; the mean follow-up was 6-12 months. The HBP group had a higher QRS reduction in the meta-analysis (median: -17.54 [-20.46, -14.62]; I² = 89%). LVEF showed a median of 8.48 (7.55, 9.41) and I² of 98%, with a higher mean in HBP. The LVESV median was -18.89 (-30.03, -7.75) and I² was 0%, and the HBP group had a lower mean. HBP had a lower NYHA functional class (median= -0.20 [-0.28, -0.12]).

CONCLUSION

After implantation, HBP demonstrated bigger QRS shortening, increased LVEF, lower LVES volume, and lower NYHA class than BiV pacing.

Left Bundle Branch Pacing for Bradycardia in Non-obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Patients: Feasibility, Safety, and Effect

PURPOSE

Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is as an innovative physiological pacing approach. The research on LBBP in non-obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (NOHCM) patients is scarce. This study aimed to assess the feasibility, safety, and effect of LBBP in bradycardia NOHCM patients with permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation indication.

METHODS

Thirteen consecutive patients with NOHCM who received LBBP were retrospectively enrolled as a hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) group. Following 1:3 matching, 39 patients without HCM were randomly matched as a control group. Echocardiographic index and pacing parameters were collected.

RESULTS

The successful LBBP was achieved in 96.2% of all cases (50/52), and the success rate of the HCM group was 92.3% (12/13). In the HCM group, the paced QRS duration (from the pacing stimulus to QRS end) was 145.6±20.8 ms. The stimulus to left ventricular activation time (s-LVAT) was 87.4±15.2 ms. In the control group, the paced QRS duration was 139.4±17.2 ms, and the s-LVAT was 79.9±14.1 ms. During the implantation, R-wave sensing and the pacing threshold of the HCM group were significantly higher than the control group (20.2±10.5 vs 12.5±5.9 mV, P < 0.05; 0.8±0.3 vs 0.6±0.2V/0.4 ms, P < 0.05). In addition, the fluoroscopic duration and procedural duration were longer in the HCM group (14.8±8.3 vs 10.3±6.6min, P = 0.07; 131.8±50.5 vs 101.4±41.6 min, P < 0.05). The lead insertion depth was 15±2 mm in the HCM group, and no procedure-related complications occurred. During the 12-month follow-up, pacing parameters remained stable and were of no significance in the two groups. The cardiac function did not deteriorate, and the left ventricular outflow tract gradient (LVOTG) did not increase in the follow-up.

CONCLUSION

LBBP might be feasible and safe for NOHCM patients with conventional bradycardia pacing indication, and there is no deterioration in cardiac function and LVOTG of patients with NOHCM.

Assessment of Cardiac Function and Ventricular Mechanical Synchronization in Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing by Speckle Tracking and Three-Dimensional Echocardiography

Real-time 3-dimensional echocardiography combined with speckle tracking was used in this study. A total of 90 patients with normal left ventricular ejection fraction were divided into 3 groups according to the pacing site: left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), right ventricular septal pacing (RVSP) or right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP). Procedure duration (90 ± 18 vs 61 ± 6.6 vs 58 ± 5.6 minutes, p = 0.015), Fluoroscopy duration (15.5 ± 5.4 vs 4.8 ± 2.2 vs 4 ± 1.9 minutes, p = 0.004), and ventricular capture threshold at implantation (0.8 ± 0.3 vs 0.6 ± 0.2 vs 0.6 ± 0.1 V, p = 0.002) were significantly increased in patients that received LBBAP compared with RVSP or RVAP. At 4 weeks of follow-up, brain natriuretic peptide levels were significantly lower (22 [12 to 59] vs 135 [86 to 231] vs 235 [147 to 428] pg/ml, p = 0.04), paced QRS duration was significantly shorter (115 ± 26 vs 134 ± 28 vs 157 ± 29 ms, p = 0.012), and global longitudinal strain (-19.4 ± 2.4 vs -19.3 ± 3.4 vs -17.3 ± 3.5%, p = 0.026) and systolic dyssynchrony index (2.5 ± 0.3 vs 5.9 ± 0.9 vs 7.7 ± 1.2, p = 0.001), longitudinal absolute maximum difference of time to peak strain (17 [6 to 68] vs 117 [71 to 173] vs 126 [79 to 178] ms, p <0.0001), and circumferential absolute maximum difference of time to peak strain (76 [32 to 129] vs 148 [117 to 208] vs 161 [118 to 266] ms, p = 0.005) were significantly lower in patients that received LBBAP compared with RVSP or RVAP. In conclusion, LBBAP can provide a more physiological ventricular activation pattern than RVSP or RVAP and results in good left ventricular electrical and mechanical synchronization.

Success rates, challenges and troubleshooting of left bundle branch area pacing as a cardiac resynchronization therapy for treating patients with heart failure

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an important treatment of heart failure patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and asynchrony of cardiac electromechanical activity. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) is a novel physiological pacing modality that appears to be an effective method for CRT. LBBaP has several advantages over the traditional biventricular-CRT (BiV-CRT), including a low and stable pacing capture threshold, a high success rate of implantation, a short learning curve, and high economic feasibility. However, LBBaP is not suitable for all heart failure patients needing a CRT and the success rates of LBBaP in heart failure patients is lower because of myocardial fibrosis, non-specific intraventricular conduction disturbance (IVCD), enlargement of the right atrium or right ventricle, etc. In this literature review, we summarize the success rates, challenges, and troubleshooting of LBBaP in heart failure patients needing a CRT.

Advances of Implantation Techniques for Conduction System Pacing

Conduction system pacing (CSP), including His bundle and left bundle branch pacing are physiological pacing modalities, but lead deployment is often difficult mainly due to a lack of anatomical landmark for lead tip location. Several implantation techniques for CSP implantation have been developed including 3-dimensional electroanatomical mapping, placing a second lead as a reference (dual-lead method technique), and using fluoroscopic imaging (9-partition and visualization techniques). In this review, the authors summarize the implantation techniques for CSP and compare the different methods.

Right-sided approach to left bundle branch area pacing combined with atrioventricular node ablation in a patient with persistent left superior vena cava and left bundle branch block: a case report

Background

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is an alternative to right ventricular (RV) and biventricular (BiV) pacing in patients scheduled for pace and ablate treatment strategy. However, current delivery sheaths are designed for left-sided implantation, making the right-sided LBBAP lead implantation challenging.

Case presentation

We report a case of a right-sided LBBAP approach via right subclavian vein in a heart failure patient with a persistent left superior vena cava scheduled for pace and ablate treatment of refractory atrial flutter. To enable adequate lead positioning and support for transseptal screwing, the delivery sheath was manually modified with a 90-degree curve at the right subclavian vein and superior vena cava junction to allow right-sided implantation. The distance between the reshaping point and the presumed septal region was estimated by placing the sheath on the body surface under fluoroscopy. With the reshaping of the delivery sheath, we were able to achieve LBBAP with relatively minimal torque. Radiofrequency ablation of the atrioventricular node was performed the next day and the pacing parameters remained stable in short-term follow-up.

Conclusion

With the modification of currently available tools, LBBAP can be performed with the right-sided approach.

Tricuspid Regurgitation Related to Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: An Integrative Review

The use of cardiac implantable electronic devices, including permanent pacemakers, implantable cardiac defibrillators and cardiac resynchronization therapy, has dramatically increased in recent years. The interaction between the device lead and tricuspid valve leaflets is a potential cause of tricuspid regurgitation which in turn has an impact on morbidity and mortality. Echocardiography is necessary for grading of tricuspid regurgitation severity. The use of three-dimensional imaging helps determine whether the device lead is interfering with normal leaflet coaptation. Early identification of lead-related tricuspid regurgitation is critical to select the optimal treatment, which may include lead extraction or even tricuspid valve repair/replacement in severe cases. This review aims to provide a thorough assessment of the evidence about lead-associated tricuspid regurgitation, the benefits of using 3D echocardiography with some technical considerations, and finally, propose a treatment algorithm.

Dynamic changes of atrioventricular conduction during Covid-19 infection: Does inflammation matter?

Background

The primary manifestation of COVID-19 infection was pulmonary involvement. However, it can also manifest as a cardiovascular problem.

Methods

We report a case of 82-year-old male COVID-19 patient who experienced atrioventricular (AV) conduction disturbance.

Results

The rhythm was degenerated from sinus rhythm to complete AV block. We observe dynamic AV node dysfunction associated with inflammatory response. His bundle pacing successfully captured distal His region.

Conclusion

The severe inflammatory response during COVID-19 infection might permanently damage cardiac conduction system resulted in a complete AV node block.

A Case Report of a Wenckebach Phenomenon Occurring during a His-Bundle Pacing Procedure: Is It Atrioventricular Node Pacing?

A 70-year-old man with severe valvular cardiomyopathy, permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) with a slow ventricular response, and transient atrioventricular (AV) block, was admitted to our center for severe heart failure and recurrent presyncope. While hospitalized, the coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) showed huge atriums. We tried His bundle pacing (HBP). HB potential was observed at site A, and the His-ventricular (HV) interval was 68 ms. The duration from the stimulus signal to the onset of paced QRS (S-QRSonset) at site A was 232 ms when pacing at 60 beats per minute (BPM) with the pacing threshold of 2.0 V/0.5 ms. The S-QRSonset was longer than the HV interval and had a notable and progressive prolongation from 252 ms to 456 ms during the pacing at 90 BPM. Then, we pushed another lead a little forward, and the S-QRSonset shortened back to 68 ms, and the paced QRS morphology was the same as the intrinsic QRS morphology with the pacing threshold of 1.5 V/0.5 ms. The progressively prolonged S-QRSonset demonstrated a Wenckebach phenomenon (WP), a well-known electrophysiological characteristic of the AV node (AVN). It is the first time to report an intraoperative AVN-pacing related-WP in a patient with persistent AF. The enlarged atrium might be convenient for capturing the AVN. There are some other potential explanations for this phenomenon. The diameters of atriums decreased significantly, and the symptoms improved after the procedure. This is the first reported case in which we might achieve AVN capture in a patient with persistent AF. Although we ultimately chose HBP for better long-term pacing thresholds, the result of this case suggested that AVN pacing may be possible.

ESC-Leitlinien 2021: Conduction System Pacing

Die aktuellen ESC-Leitlinien von 2021 bezüglich des direkten Pacings an den Strukturen des ventrikulären myokardialen Erregungsleitungssystems sind sehr defensiv ausgelegt. Verglichen mit den Leitlinienempfehlungen aus Japan oder USA wird diese Art der „physiologischen Stimulation“ in Europa eher in den Schatten gestellt. Auch wenn randomisierte Studien mit harten Endpunkten zur His-Bündel- und Linksschenkelstimulation fehlen, konnten doch in einer Vielzahl von Untersuchungen die Sicherheit, Effektivität und auch klinische Überlegenheit gegenüber einer klassischen rechtsventrikulären oder biventrikulären Stimulation gezeigt werden. Die vorliegende Leitlinienfassung der ESC zur Herzschrittmachertherapie ist in diesem Punkt daher durchaus diskutabel.

Risk factors of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy-Insights from lead position

There was no significant difference in the incidence of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy between right ventricular apex pacing group and OpenCurlyQuote;true CloseCurlyQuote; mid-right ventricular septum pacing group. The preoperative left ventricular end-systolic diameter and paced QRS duration were independent predictors of PICM.

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.

Evaluation of electrophysiological characteristics and ventricular synchrony: An intrapatient-controlled study during His-Purkinje conduction system pacing versus right ventricular pacing

Objectives to Background

To compare electromechanical ventricular synchrony when pacing from different sites, including right ventricular apex pacing (RVAP), right ventricular septum pacing (RVSP), His bundle pacing (HBP), left bundle branch pacing (LBBP), and RVSP during unipolar pacing from the ring electrode of LBBP lead (RVSP_ring) in each patient and evaluate the correlations between electrophysiological characteristics and ventricular synchrony.

Methods

Twenty patients with complete atrioventricular block indicated for dual‐chamber pacemaker implantation were included in the study. Unipolar pacing at different sites, including RVAP, RVSP, HBP, LBBP, and RVSP_ring, was successively performed in each patient. The pacing characteristics and echocardiogram parameters were collected and compared among intrinsic rhythm and pacing at different sites.

Results

Similar to HBP (114.84 ± 18.67 ms), narrower paced QRSd was found in LBBP (116.15 ± 11.60 ms) as compared to RVSP_ring (135.11 ± 13.68 ms), RVSP (141.65 ± 14.26 ms), and RVAP (160.15 ± 19.35 ms) (p < .001). LBBP showed comparable pacing parameters to RVAP or RVSP and was significantly better than HBP, with maintained cardiac function. TS‐12‐SD was significantly improved in LBBP (41.80 ± 20.97 ms) than RVAP (69.70 ± 32.42 ms, p = .003) and RVSP (63.30.56 ± 32.53 ms, p = .018) but similar to HBP (51.50 ± 25.67 ms, p = .283) or RVSP_ring (57.80 ± 25.65 ms, p = .198). Among these pacing strategies, negative values of interventricular mechanical delay (IVMD) were only identified in LBBP (−19.25 ± 18.43 ms), significantly different from RVAP (35.00 ± 30.72 ms), RVSP (22.85 ± 22.05 ms), HBP (5.20 ± 18.64 ms), and RVSP_ring (16.00 ± 26.76 ms (all p < .05). Using Pearson's analysis, Sti‐LVAT was positively correlated with QRS duration, IVMD, TS‐12‐SD, LVEDV, and LVESV, while a negative relationship could be observed for left ventricular ejection fraction.

Conclusions

His‐Purkinje conduction system pacing (HPCSP) achieved better electrical and mechanical synchrony than conventional RV pacing. For interventricular synchrony, only LBBP initiated earlier LV activation than RV, in accordance with the right bundle branch block (RBBB) pattern of paced QRS during LBBP. Sti‐LVAT might be a good parameter correlating with LV systolic function and mechanical synchrony.

Incidence and predictors of pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy with right ventricular pacing: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review aims to evaluate the incidence and predictors of PICM in patients undergoing right ventricular pacing.

AREAS COVERED

A literature review was conducted using Mesh terms (Right ventricular pacing, Pacemaker-related cardiomyopathy, Pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy) in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of science CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library until October 2021. All data reporting the incidence of PICM after implantation of right-sided pacemakers or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) were retrieved from the eligible studies.

EXPERT OPINION

Out of 3,625 articles, 20 studies met the inclusion criteria that included 5,381 patients with PICM. The mean age of the patients ranged between 55.8 ± 13.5 and 77.4 ± 10.8 years. The mean incidence of PICM was 25.7%. Mean EF at baseline ranged from 48 ± 1% and 62.1 ± 11.2%, while mean EF at follow up ranged between 33.7± 7.4% and 53.2 ± 8.2%. Three studies reported a decline of >20% EF at follow-up. RV pacing was associated with a considerable risk of PICM, with biological factors such as male gender, old age, increased QRS duration, and chronic RV pacing burden playing an important role in the development of disease.

Optimization of Left Ventricle Pace Maker Location Using Echo-Based Fluid-Structure Interaction Models

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac pacing has been an effective treatment in the management of patients with bradyarrhythmia and tachyarrhythmia. Different pacemaker location has different responses, and pacemaker effectiveness to each individual can also be different. A novel image-based ventricle animal modeling approach was proposed to optimize ventricular pacemaker site for better cardiac outcome.

METHOD

One health female adult pig (weight 42.5 kg) was used to make a pacing animal model with different ventricle pacing locations. Ventricle surface electric signal, blood pressure and echo image were acquired 15 min after the pacemaker was implanted. Echo-based left ventricle fluid-structure interaction models were constructed to perform ventricle function analysis and investigate impact of pacemaker location on cardiac outcome. With the measured electric signal map from the pig associated with the actual pacemaker site, electric potential conduction of myocardium was modeled by material stiffening and softening in our model, with stiffening simulating contraction and softening simulating relaxation. Ventricle model without pacemaker (NP model) and three ventricle models with the following pacemaker locations were simulated: right ventricular apex (RVA model), posterior interventricular septum (PIVS model) and right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT model). Since higher peak flow velocity, flow shear stress (FSS), ventricle stress and strain are linked to better cardiac function, those data were collected for model comparisons.

RESULTS

At the peak of filling, velocity magnitude, FSS, stress and strain for RVOT and PIVS models were 13%, 45%, 18%, 13% and 5%, 30%, 10%, 5% higher than NP model, respectively. At the peak of ejection, velocity magnitude, FSS, stress and strain for RVOT and PIVS models were 50%, 44%, 54%, 59% and 23%, 36%, 39%, 53% higher than NP model, respectively. RVA model had lower velocity, FSS, stress and strain than NP model. RVOT model had higher peak flow velocity and stress/strain than PIVS model. It indicated RVOT pacemaker site may be the best location.

CONCLUSION

This preliminary study indicated that RVOT model had the best performance among the four models compared. This modeling approach could be used as "virtual surgery" to try various pacemaker locations and avoid risky and dangerous surgical experiments on real patients.

Clinical Outcomes Associated With His-Purkinje System Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing, in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Meta-Analysis

Aims

His-Purkinje system pacing has recently emerged as an alternative to biventricular pacing (BIVP) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis comparing the clinical outcomes associated with His-Purkinje system pacing (HPSP) vs. BIVP in patients with heart failure. There is also a comparison of clinical outcomes of His-bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) in the His-Purkinje system.

Methods

We searched the Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed, for studies published between January 2010 and October 2021 that compared the clinical outcomes associated with HPSP vs. BIVP and HBP vs. LBBP in HPSP in patients who underwent CRT. The pacing threshold, R-wave amplitudes, QRS duration, New York Heart Association functional (NYHA), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and LV end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) of heart failure, at follow-up, were extracted and summarized for meta-analysis.

Results

A total of 18 studies and 1517 patients were included in our analysis. After a follow-up period of 9.3 ± 5.4 months, the HPSP was found to be associated with shorter QRS duration in the CRT population compared to that in the BIVP (SMD, −1.17; 95% CI, −1.56 to −0.78; P &lt; 0.00001; I2 = 74%). No statistical difference was verified between HBP and LBBP on QRS duration (SMD, 0.04; 95% CI, −0.32 to 0.40; P = 0.82; I2 = 84%). In the comparison of HPSP and BIVP, the LBBP subgroup showed improved LVEF (SMD, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.42–0.91; P &lt; 0.00001; I2 = 0%), shorter LVEDD (SMD, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.93–0.26; P = 0.0005; I2 = 0%), and higher New York Heart Association functional class (SMD, −0.65; 95% CI, −0.86 to −0.43; P &lt; 0.00001; I2 = 45%). In terms of pacing threshold and R-wave amplitude clinical outcomes, LBBP has a lower pacing threshold (SMD, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.12–1.39; P &lt; 0.00001; I2 = 47%) and higher R-wave amplitude (MD, −7.88; 95% CI, −8.46 to −7.31; P &lt; 0.00001; I2 = 8%) performance compared to HBP.

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis showed that the HPSP produced higher LVEF, shorter QRS duration, and higher NYHA functional class in the CRT population than the BIVP as observed on follow-up. LBBP has a lower pacing threshold and higher R-wave amplitude. HPSP may be a new and promising alternative to BIVP in the future.

Meta-Analysis Comparing Safety and Efficacy of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus His Bundle Pacing

Although His bundle pacing (HBP) can provide a physiologic ventricular activation pattern, it has disadvantages such as the difficulty of lead implantation, reduced R wave amplitudes, and high and unstable pacing thresholds. Recent studies have demonstrated that left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) might overcome these deficiencies. A total of 7 nonrandomized controlled studies including 786 patients (n = 442 receiving LBBaP and n = 344 receiving HBP) with bradyarrhythmia were evaluated. Compared with HBP, LBBaP appeared to result in increased R wave amplitudes (at implant: MD 9.84 mV, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.61 to 12.06 mV; at follow-up: MD 7.62 mV, 95% CI 6.73 to 8.50 mV), lowered capture thresholds (at implant: MD -0.73 V, 95% CI -0.81 to -0.64 V; at follow-up: MD -0.71 V, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.50 V), shortened procedure times (MD -16.70 minutes, 95% CI -26.51 to -6.90 minutes) and fluoroscopic durations (MD -6.16 min, 95% CI -8.28 to -4.03 minutes), and increased success rates (odds ratio 2.14, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.74); all of these differences were significant. However, paced QRS durations, the lead impedance at implantation and follow-up, and incidence of lead-related complications such as lead dislodgement did not significantly differ between LBBaP and HBP. In conclusion, current evidence suggests that LBBaP is a potential alternative to HBP as a pacing modality with which to maintain an ideal physiologic pattern of ventricular activation through native His-Purkinje system stimulation.

Pacemaker and Atrioventricular Junction Ablation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation—A Systematic Review of Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) could be considered for heart failure (HF) patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) unless a potent ventricular capture strategy is conducted. However, the benefit of a pacemaker (PM; as part of CRT) in patients with AF and whether atrioventricular junction (or nodal) ablation (AVAB) can improve the prognosis of these patients compared with those treated medically to support ventricular capture are unclear.

Methods and Results

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses investigating the roles of PMs and AVAB in patients with AF were obtained in a search of the PubMed, Embase, and Medline databases and then analyzed with respect to the following outcomes: mortality, left ventricular ejection fraction, and clinical findings including the New York Heart Association class, 6-min walk distance (6MWD), quality of life as assessed in a specific questionnaire, and response to CRT. The quality of the included reviews was assessed using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 tool, which includes 16 items. This study was finally based on 13 systematic reviews or meta-analyses. The results showed that patients with AF have higher all-cause mortality rates compared with patients with sinus rhythm and that AVAB can reduce all-cause mortality in patients with AF. Although the functional improvement was better in sinus rhythm than in patients with AF, in the latter, AVAB increased the 6MWD and reduced the CRT nonresponse rate in patients with AF.

Conclusion

Atrial fibrillation is associated with a higher all-cause mortality rate in patients with CRT implantation. AVAB, by increasing the 6MWD and survival, can improve the prognosis of these patients.

Conduction system pacing versus biventricular pacing: Reduced repolarization heterogeneity in addition to improved depolarization

INTRODUCTION

His-bundle pacing (HBP) and left-bundle-area pacing (LBAP) are conduction system pacing (CSP) modalities increasingly used as alternatives to conventional biventricular pacing (BiVP). While effects of CSP on ventricular depolarization have been reported, effects on ventricular repolarization have not.

METHODS

QRS duration (QRSd) and validated ECG parameters of ventricular repolarization associated with arrhythmic risk (T-peak-to-T-end_Transmural , T-peak-to-T-end_Total , T-peak dispersion, QTc, QTc dispersion) were analyzed post-implant in 107 patients: 60 with CSP (HBP: n = 35, LBAP: n = 25) and 47 with BiVP. T-wave memory resolution and QTc shortening were analyzed on ECGs obtained ≥25 days post-implant. Twenty blinded measurements were obtained by both authors to assess Interobserver variability.

RESULTS

Although QRSd was shorter with HBP versus LBAP (119 ± 7 ms vs. 132 ± 9 ms, p = .02), there were no significant differences in any repolarization parameters between these methods of CSP. However, when comparing CSP (HBP + LBAP) to BiVP, both QRSd (125 ± 5 ms vs. 147 ± 7 ms, p < .0001) and repolarization parameters (T-peak-to-T-end_Transmural : 83 ± 5 ms vs. 107 ± 8 ms; T-peak-to-T-end_Total : 110 ± 7 ms vs. 137 ± 10 ms; QTc: 470 ± 12 ms vs. 506 ± 12 ms; all p ≤ .0001) were significantly shorter with CSP. Improved T-peak-to-T-end values were unrelated to pre-implant QRSd or LV function. Interobserver variability was 4.6 ± 1.9 ms. Frontal QRS-T angle narrowing (132° to 104°, p = .001) and QTc shortening (483 ± 13 ms to 464 ± 12 ms, p = .008) were seen only with CSP.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to improved depolarization, CSP reduced repolarization heterogeneity and provided greater T-wave memory resolution as compared to BiVP. Both modalities of CSP (HBP + LBAP) resulted in comparably reduced repolarization heterogeneity regardless of baseline QRSd and LV function. These observations may confer lower arrhythmogenic risk and warrant further study.

His Bundle Pacing: A promising alternative strategy for Antibradycardic-pacing. Report of a single center-experience

His Bundle Pacing (HBP) is proven to be a safe and effective alternative pacing modality that, in addition, avoids Pacemaker-induced Cardiomyopathy (PICM) by achieving a ''physiological'' ventricular stimulation, via the native conduction system. Indications include various causes of bradycardia requiring antibradycardic pacing, inadequately controlled Atrial Fibrillation requiring AV node ablation and established PICM. In addition, HBP may also be used as an alternative therapy for patients with Heart Failure (HF) and an indication for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy. Available data show a benefit from HBP with regard to preservation or restoration of intra- and inter-ventricular synchronization, improvement in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction, functional status and Quality of Life, decrease in atrial fibrillation incidence and improvement in HF hospitalization rates, compared to conventional pacing. Nevertheless, superiority in terms of mortality rates has not been consistently demonstrated and long-term efficacy and safety remains to be proven. In the present manuscript, we review the status of HBP and we present our current experience with this novel pacing modality.

Pacing therapy for atrioventricular dromotropathy: a combined computational-experimental-clinical study

AIMS

Investigate haemodynamic effects, and their mechanisms, of restoring atrioventricular (AV)-coupling using pacemaker therapy in normal and failing hearts in a combined computational-experimental-clinical study.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Computer simulations were performed in the CircAdapt model of the normal and failing human heart and circulation. Experiments were performed in a porcine model of AV dromotropathy. In a proof-of-principle clinical study, left ventricular (LV) pressure and volume were measured in 22 heart failure (HF) patients (LV ejection fraction <35%) with prolonged PR interval (>230 ms) and narrow or non-left bundle branch block QRS complex. Computer simulations and animal studies in normal hearts showed that restoring of AV-coupling with unchanged ventricular activation sequence significantly increased LV filling, mean arterial pressure, and cardiac output by 10-15%. In computer simulations of failing hearts and in HF patients, reducing PR interval by biventricular (BiV) pacing (patients: from 300 ± 61 to 137 ± 30 ms) resulted in significant increases in LV stroke volume and stroke work (patients: 34 ± 40% and 26 ± 31%, respectively). However, worsening of ventricular dyssynchrony by using right ventricular (RV) pacing abrogated the benefit of restoring AV-coupling. In model simulations, animals and patients, the increase of LV filling and associated improvement of LV pump function coincided with both larger mitral inflow (E- and A-wave area) and reduction of diastolic mitral regurgitation.

CONCLUSION

Restoration of AV-coupling by BiV pacing in normal and failing hearts with prolonged AV conduction leads to considerable haemodynamic improvement. These results indicate that BiV or physiological pacing, but not RV pacing, may improve cardiac function in patients with HF and prolonged PR interval.

Is His-optimized superior to conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy in improving heart failure? Results from a propensity-matched study

BACKGROUND

His bundle pacing (HBP), alone or optimized in association with coronary sinus pacing (HBP+LV) has recently been proposed as an alternative to conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, there is lack of controlled studies that assessed clinical outcome.

METHODS

We did a single-center, propensity-score matched, case-control study of comparison of HBP and HBP+LV versus conventional CRT in patients with heart failure (HF) and standard indications for CRT. The study group patients were consecutively enrolled in the year 2019. The control group patients were selected, by propensity score matching, among those CRT implantations performed in the years 2015-2018.

RESULTS

There were 27 patients in each group. In the active group, 12 (44%) patients received HBP alone and 12 (44%) patients HBP+LV pacing. HBP failed in three (11%) patients. In the control group, conventional CRT was achieved in 26 (96%) patients and failed in one. Paced QRS width was shorter in the active than in the control group (128 ± 18 vs. 148 ± 27 ms, p = .004). During a mean of 9.6 months of follow-up, a composite clinical outcome of death, hospitalization for HF or worsening HF occurred in three (11%) in the active group and in four (15%) in the control group, p = .58. No difference was also observed with softer endpoints: NYHA class (1.9 ± 0.7 vs. 2.1 ± 0.7), subjective improvement (74% vs. 74%) and LV ejection fraction (40.7% vs. 40.7%).

CONCLUSION

Compared with conventional CRT, a shorter QRS width can be obtained with HBP alone or in association with coronary sinus pacing but we were unable to show a better clinical outcome. There is urgent need for large, randomized trials.

Brady-arrhythmias in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure of reduced ejection fraction: is his-bundle pacing superior to biventricular pacing？

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of His-bundle pacing (HBP) compared with the traditional biventricular pacing (BVP) on patients with brady-arrhythmias, who suffer from permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS

All patients with brady-arrhythmias, permanent AF and HFrEF were continuously enrolled from January 2017 to July 2019 and followed up for at least 12 months. The differences in QRS duration (QRSd), New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), tricuspid regurgitation grade, mitral regurgitation grade, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), and left atrial size were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 52 patients were enrolled: 37 patients were with HBP and 15 patients with BVP. There was no electrode dislodged, perforation, infection or thrombosis during the follow-up of 18.12 ± 4.45 months. The success rate for HBP implantation was 88.10%. The capture threshold of his-bundle and the threshold of the left ventricular lead remained stable during follow-up. LVEF increased to higher than 50% in 11 patients with HBP (29.73%). The NYHA classification (both p < .001), LVEF (both p < .001) and LVEDD improved significantly during the follow-up in both groups. NYHA (p = .030), LVEF (p = .013), and LVEDD (p = .003) improved in patients with HBP compared with BVP.

CONCLUSION

HBP was safe and more effective in improving the cardiac function and remodeling in patients with brady-arrhythmias, permanent AF and HFrEF compared with BVP.

A novel and practical technique to facilitate lead insertion at the His bundle region

BACKGROUND

His bundle (HB) pacing techniques are challenging and time-consuming. This is primarily due to the limitations in locating the relatively small area of the HB body for pacing.

METHODS

Permanent HB pacing was performed in 133 consecutive patients with symptomatic bradycardia. A right atrial septo-gram (RAS) was performed in all patients to locate the HB. Briefly, 8-10 cc of contrast was injected through the Medtronic C315HIS delivery sheath while fluoroscopy cine runs were obtained in the RAO 15-20° projection. The images obtained provided the visualization of an approximately 90° angle composed by the medial aspect of the tricuspid valve annulus (TVA) anteriorly and the superior aspect of the interatrial septum superiorly. The apex of this angle coincides with the tip of the triangle of Koch (TK), where the HB body is usually located. A Medtronic SelectSecure™ MRI SureScan™ Model 3830 lead was then advanced and directed towards this area. The HB was mapped using pace mapping and unipolar recordings from the lead tip.

RESULTS

Localization of the apex of the TK/HB body with the RAS was successful in all patients. The overall acute success of inserting the lead at the HB was 95%.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that our method of utilizing a RAS to facilitate the localization the HB body proved to be safe and efficient in achieving permanent HB pacing with a success rate higher than previously reported.

Representation of the His Bundle Cloud on a Three-dimensional Electroanatomical Map and Its Implications for His Bundle Pacing

His bundle pacing has been proposed as a more physiologic approach to chronic ventricular stimulation, yet the achievement of permanent His bundle pacing can be challenging.

Impact of His bundle pacing on right ventricular performance in patients undergoing permanent pacemaker implantation

BACKGROUND

His-Bundle pacing (HBP) is an emerging technique for physiological pacing. However, its effects on right ventricle (RV) performance are still unknown.

METHODS

We enrolled consecutive patients with an indication for pacemaker (PM) implantation to compare HBP versus RV pacing (RVP) effects on RV performance. Patients were evaluated before implantation and after 6 months by a transthoracic echocardiogram.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients (age 75.1±7.9 years, 64% male) were enrolled, 42 patients (50%) underwent successful HBP, and 42 patients (50%) apical RVP. At follow up, we found a significant improvement in RV-FAC (Fractional Area Change)% [baseline: HBP 34 IQR (31-37) vs. RVP 33 IQR (29.7-37.2),p = .602; 6-months: HBP 37 IQR (33-39) vs. RVP 30 IQR (27.7-35), p < .0001] and RV-GLS (Global Longitudinal Strain)% [baseline: HBP -18 IQR (-20.2 to -15) vs. RVP -16 IQR (-18.7 to -14), p = .150; 6-months: HBP -20 IQR(-23 to -17) vs. RVP -13.5 IQR (-16 to -11), p < .0001] with HBP whereas RVP was associated with a significant decline in both parameters. RVP was also associated with a significant worsening of tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) (p < .0001) and S wave velocity (p < .0001) at follow up. Conversely from RVP, HBP significantly improved pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP) [baseline: HBP 38 IQR (32-42) mmHg vs. RVP 34 IQR (31.5-37) mmHg,p = .060; 6-months: HBP 32 IQR (26-38) mmHg vs. RVP 39 IQR (36-41) mmHg, p < .0001] and tricuspid regurgitation (p = .005) irrespectively from lead position above or below the tricuspid valve.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing PM implantation, HBP ensues a beneficial and protective impact on RV performance compared with RVP.

First in situ 3D visualization of the human cardiac conduction system and its transformation associated with heart contour and inclination

Current advanced imaging modalities with applied tracing and processing techniques provide excellent visualization of almost all human internal structures in situ; however, the actual 3D internal arrangement of the human cardiac conduction system (CCS) is still unknown. This study is the first to document the successful 3D visualization of the CCS from the sinus node to the bundle branches within the human body, based on our specialized physical micro-dissection and its CT imaging. The 3D CCS transformation by cardiac inclination changes from the standing to the lying position is also provided. Both actual dissection and its CT image-based simulation identified that when the cardiac inclination changed from standing to lying, the sinus node shifted from the dorso-superior to the right outer position and the atrioventricular conduction axis changed from a vertical to a leftward horizontal position. In situ localization of the human CCS provides accurate anatomical localization with morphometric data, and it indicates the useful correlation between heart inclination and CCS rotation axes for predicting the variable and invisible human CCS in the living body. Advances in future imaging modalities and methodology are essential for further accurate in situ 3D CCS visualization.

Bradyarrhythmias and Physiologic Pacing in the ICU

Bradyarrhythmias represent a common pathology in the intensive care unit (ICU) with etiologies of varying severity. Treatment has often been focused on correcting underlying causes and may require pacing for urgent hemodynamic support. In recent years, there has been interest in physiologic pacing modalities which avoid the dyssynchrony from right ventricular (RV) only pacing. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) through biventricular pacing is a well-established device-based electrical therapy in patients with wide QRS and heart failure. Recently, it has been shown that biventricular pacing may also be pursued for hemodynamic rescue in the ICU setting. Efforts to re-engage the conduction system with His bundle pacing or further downstream have also emerged as alternative means to deliver resynchronization, with early applications in the ICU now being reported. The goal of the review is to examine bradyarrhythmia causes and management in the ICU as well as investigate new approaches in physiologic pacing and their potential roles in critically ill patients.

Leadless Left Ventricular Endocardial Pacing and Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy is an important intervention to reduce mortality and morbidity, but even in carefully selected patients approximately 30% fail to improve. This has led to alternative pacing approaches to improve patient outcomes. Left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing allows pacing at site-specific locations that enable the operator to avoid myocardial scar and target areas of latest activation. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) provides a more physiological activation pattern and may allow effective cardiac resynchronisation. This article discusses LV endocardial pacing in detail, including the indications, techniques and outcomes. It discusses LBBAP, its potential benefits over His bundle pacing and procedural outcomes. Finally, it concludes with the future role of endocardial pacing and LBBAP in heart failure patients.

Innovations in Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are essential for the management of a variety of cardiac conditions, including tachyarrhythmias, bradyarrhythmias, and medically refractory heart failure (HF). Recent advancements in CIED technology have led to innovative solutions that overcome shortcomings associated with traditional devices or address unmet needs. Leadless pacemakers, subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and extravascular ICDs eliminate lead-related complications common with conventional pacemakers or ICDs. Conduction system pacing (His bundle pacing and left bundle branch pacing) is a more physiologic method of pacing and avoids the deleterious consequences associated with long-term right ventricular pacing. For HF-related devices, cardiac contractility modulation is an emerging therapy that bridges a gap for many patients ineligible for cardiac resynchronization therapy and has been shown to improve HF symptoms and decrease hospitalizations and mortality in select patients. Implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitors help guide HF management and reduce hospitalizations. Lastly, new phrenic nerve stimulating devices are being utilized to treat central sleep apnea, a common comorbidity associated with HF. While further long-term studies are still underway for many of these new technologies, it is anticipated that these devices will become indispensable therapeutics in the expanding cardiovascular armamentarium.

Comparison of electrical characteristics and pacing parameters of pacing different parts of the His-Purkinje system in bradycardia patients

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate the electrical characteristics and pacing parameters at different locations of His-Purkinje system pacing.

METHODS

Patients who successfully underwent His-Purkinje system pacing with bradycardia indications from April 2018 to August 2019 were retrospectively analyzed according to the lead location confirmed by visualization of the tricuspid value annulus, postoperative echocardiography, and pacing electrocardiogram. The electrical characteristics and pacing parameters were compared among these patients.

RESULTS

A total of 135 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 30 patients received atrial side HBP (aHBP group), 52 received ventricular side HBP (vHBP group), and 53 received left bundle branch pacing (LBBP group). The proportion of non-selective pacing was significantly lower in aHBP group (30.0%) than in vHBP (75.0%) and LBBP group (90.6%). LBBP had significantly shorter procedural and fluoroscopic duration than aHBP and vHBP. The capture threshold was significantly higher (1.07 ± 0.26 V/1.0 ms vs. 0.89 ± 0.22 V/1.0 ms vs. 0.77 ± 0.18 V/0.4 ms, P < 0.01, respectively), and the R-wave amplitude was significantly lower (3.71 ± 1.72 mV vs. 5.81 ± 2.37 mV vs. 10.27 ± 4.71 mV, P < 0.05 respectively) in aHBP group than those in the other two groups at implantation and during 3-month follow-up. No significant differences were observed in complications among groups during 3-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

VHBP and LBBP had better pacing performances than aHBP and might be more ideal pacing methods for bradycardia patients.

The Year in Electrophysiology: Selected Highlights From 2020

This article is the third in an annual series for the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. The authors thank the Editor-in-Chief Dr. Kaplan, the Associate Editor-in-Chief Dr. Augoustides, and the editorial board for the opportunity to continue this series; namely, the highlights of the year that pertain to electrophysiology in relation to cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia. This third article focuses on the convergent procedure, His-bundle pacing, a comparison of subcutaneous and transvenous defibrillator therapies, the 2020 practice advisory update for the perioperative management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices, and a technology update regarding the Micra AV (Medtronic, Moundsview, MN), the EMPOWER leadless pacemaker (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA), WiSE-CRT (EBR Systems, Sunnyvale, CA), the Extravascular Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (Medtronic, Moundsview, MN), and the BAROSTIM NEO (CVRx Inc, Minneapolis, MN).