Single-chamber versus dual-chamber pacing for high-grade atrioventricular block

Dual-chamber vs. single-chamber pacemaker in patients in sinus rhythm with an atrioventricular block: a nationwide cohort study

AIMS

In complete atrioventricular block (AVB) with underlying sinus rhythm, it is recommended to implant a dual-chamber pacemaker rather than a single-chamber pacemaker. However, no large-scale study has been able to demonstrate the superiority of this choice on hard clinical criteria such as morbimortality.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This retrospective observational study included all patients who received a primary pacemaker implantation in the indication of complete AVB with underlying sinus rhythm in France, based on the national administrative database between January 2013 and December 2022. After propensity score matching, we obtained two groups containing 19 219 patients each. The incidence of all-cause mortality was 9.22%/year for the dual-chamber pacemaker group, compared with 11.48%/year for the single-chamber pacemaker group (hazard ratio (HR) 0.807, P < 0.0001]. Similarly, there was a lower incidence of cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.766, P < 0.0001), heart failure (HR 0.908, P < 0.0001), atrial fibrillation (HR 0.778, P < 0.0001), and ischaemic stroke (HR 0.873, P = 0.008) in the dual-chamber pacemaker group than in the single-chamber pacemaker group. Regarding re-interventions and complications, there were fewer upgrades (addition of atrial lead or left ventricular lead) in the dual-chamber group (HR 0.210, P < 0.0001), but more haematomas (HR 1.179, P = 0.006) and lead repositioning (HR 1.123, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

In the indication of complete AVB with underlying sinus rhythm, our results are consistent with current recommendations to prefer implantation of a dual-chamber pacemaker rather than a single-chamber pacemaker for these patients. Implantation of a dual-chamber pacemaker is associated with a lower risk of mortality, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and stroke during follow-up.

Comparison of clinical and echocardiographic outcomes between left bundle branch area pacing and right ventricular pacing in older patients

BACKGROUND

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is safe and effective, but studies in older patients are lacking. This study compared the clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of LBBAP and right ventricular pacing (RVP) in patients aged ≥75 years.

METHODS

This prospective observational study included older patients with symptomatic bradycardia who underwent LBBAP or RVP between 2019 and 2022. Clinical data, including pacing and electrophysiological characteristics, echocardiographic measurements, and device-related complications were collected. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and upgrade to biventricular pacing. Secondary outcomes included changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

RESULTS

Of 267 included patients, 110 underwent LBBAP and 157 underwent RVP. LBBAP was successful in 109 patients (success rate: 99.1%), with one patient eventually undergoing RVP. The pacing parameters of LBBAP were similar to those of RVP, except for a significantly narrower paced QRS duration (112.8 ± 11.6 vs. 138.3 ± 23.9 ms, p < .001). Ventricular lead implanting procedural duration was longer for LBBAP than RVP (14.0 vs. 6.0 min, p < .001), as was the fluoroscopy time (4.0 vs. 2.0 min, p < .001). During a mean follow-up period of 31.0 ± 16.8 months, the primary outcome incidence was significantly lower following LBBAP than RVP (15.1% vs. 21.1%; hazard ratio, 0.471; 95% confidence interval, 0.215-1.032; p = .036) in 149 patients (55.8%) with ventricular pacing burden > 20%. RVP reduced LVEF from 62.7 ± 4.1% at baseline to 59.8 ± 7.8% at the final follow-up (p = .001), whereas LBBAP preserved LVEF (61.4 ± 6.3% vs. 60.1 ± 7.4%, p = .429).

CONCLUSION

LBBAP demonstrated improved clinical outcomes compared with RVP and maintained LVEF in older patients with high ventricular pacing burdens.

Predictors of complications and mortality among patients undergoing pacemaker implantation in resource-limited settings: a 10-year retrospective follow-up study

INTRODUCTION

Pacemakers (PMs) are used to treat patients with severe bradycardia symptoms. They do, however, pose several complications. Even with these risks, there are only a few studies assessing PM implantation outcomes in resource-limited settings like Ethiopia and other sub-Saharan countries in general. Therefore, this study aims to assess the mid-term outcome of PM implantation in patients who have undergone PM implantation in the Cardiac Center of Ethiopia by identifying the rate and predictors of complications and death.

METHODOLOGY

This retrospective study was conducted at the Cardiac Center of Ethiopia from October 2023 to January 2024 on patients who had PM implantation from September 2012 to August 2023 to assess the midterm outcome of the patients. Complication rate and all-cause mortality rate were the outcomes of our study. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with complications and death. To analyze survival times, a Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed.

RESULTS

This retrospective follow-up study included 182 patients who underwent PM implantation between September 2012 and August 2023 and were at least 18 years old. The patients' median follow-up duration was 72 months (Interquartile range (IQR): 36-96 months). At the end of the study, 26.4% of patients experienced complications. The three most frequent complications were lead dislodgement, which affected 6.6% of patients, PM-induced tachycardia, which affected 5.5% of patients, and early battery depletion, which affected 5.5% of patients. Older age (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 1.1, 95% CI 1.04-1.1, p value < 0.001), being female (AOR 4.5, 95%CI 2-9.9, p value < 0.001), having dual chamber PM (AOR 2.95, 95%CI 1.14-7.6, p value = 0.006) were predictors of complications. Thirty-one (17%) patients died during the follow-up period. The survival rates of our patients at 3, 5, and 10 years were 94.4%, 92.1%, and 65.5% respectively with a median survival time of 11 years. Patients with a higher Charlson comorbidity index before PM implantation (AOR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.8, p = 0.04), presence of complications (AOR 3.5, 95% CI 1.2-10.6, p < 0.03), and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III or IV (AOR 3.3, 95% CI 1.05-10.1, p = 0.04) were associated with mortality.

CONCLUSION

Many complications were experienced by patients who had PMs implanted, and several factors affected their prognosis. Thus, it is essential to identify predictors of both complications and mortality to prioritize and address the manageable factors associated with both mortality and complications.

Pacemaker-induced atrial fibrillation reconsidered-associations with different pacing sites and prevention approaches

The incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF) is significantly higher in patients with pacemakers than in the general population, which could be due to patient characteristics and the diagnostic tool of the pacemaker in detecting atrial high-rate episodes and subclinical AF, but also to the pacemaker itself providing AF-promoting conditions. It is well known that high ventricular pacemaker burden increases the likelihood of AF occurrence. However, the sites of atrial and ventricular pacing may also influence the risk for AF. The conventional sites for atrial and ventricular pacing are in the right atrial appendage and in the right ventricular apex. However, growing evidence suggests that alternative pacing sites may be superior for the prevention of AF. Bachmann bundle pacing, for example, promotes interatrial excitation conduction, resulting in atrial synchronicity and a shorter total atrial activation time, which may be preventive for the occurrence of AF. Moreover, in recent years, new ventricular pacing sites have come into focus with His bundle and left bundle branch pacing. In addition to the hemodynamic and electrophysiological cardiac benefits, these new options may also offer benefits in the prevention of AF. This review provides an overview of pacing-induced AF mechanisms and the association with different pacing sites, as well as approaches for prevention of pacing-induced AF, highlighting different sites and modes of atrial pacing and the newer sites of ventricular pacing.

Outcomes of a 24/7 service for urgent permanent pacemaker implantation

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Most of the complications associated with acute and symptomatic bradyarrhythmia (ASB) occur in the time from diagnosis to permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI). We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of an urgent 24/7 PPI service (PPI-24/7) for patients with ASB.

METHODS

A total of 664 patients undergoing first-time PPI for ASB were prospectively assessed during 2 periods of identical length (18 months): 341 patients who underwent the procedure during working hours only (PPI-WH), and 323 patients who underwent the procedure after the implementation of the PPI-24/7 service. The primary safety endpoint was established as the cumulative 180-day incidence of complications related to the index arrhythmia and device implant. The primary efficacy endpoint was determined as the average number of hospital stays per patient.

RESULTS

The PPI-24/7 period was associated with a significant shortening of the time from diagnosis to implantation (median [interquartile range]): 3hours [2-6] vs 16 [5-21]). The cumulative incidence of patients with complications at 180 days was lower in the PPI-24/7 period: 9% vs 17% (adjusted odds ratio, 0.5; P=.002), due to a significant reduction in preimplant complications: 2.5% vs 12% (P <.001). The average number of hospital stays was reduced by 2 per patient in the PPI-24/7 period (nonparametric P <.001). PPI-24/7 implants performed outside working hours (n=178) were safe, with a 180-day cumulative incidence in procedure-related complications of 3.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with ASB, PPI-24/7 was associated with a significant reduction in patient morbidity and efficient hospital resource use.

Dual-chamber versus single chamber pacemakers, a systemic review and meta-analysis on sick sinus syndrome and atrioventricular block patients

Aims

The atrioventricular block (AVB) is a conduction system problem that results from the impairment in the transmission of an impulse from the atria to the ventricle, the disease has many etiologies. This article aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dual and single-chamber pacemakers in patients with SSS and AVB.

Methods

An electronic search of PubMed (Medline), EMBASE, and Google Scholar was performed from 2000 till August 15th, 2022. Retrieved articles were exported to Endnote Reference Library Software, where duplicate studies were removed from the list, and only articles meeting the eligibility criteria of this study were selected. RevMan 5.4 and STATA 16 software were used for the analysis. The modified Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias and New-castle Ottawa scale were used for quality assessment of RCTs and observational studies respectively.

Results

This study is composed of 8953 patients with sick-sinus syndrome and atrioventricular block. A total of thirteen outcomes are included in this meta-analysis, out of which atrial fibrillation significantly favored dual chamber [OR = 1.29; 95 % CI = 1.05-1.59; P = 0.01 I2 = 29 %] and overall complications [OR = 0.48; 95 % CI = 0.29-0.77; p = 0.03 I2 = 0 %] and pneumothorax [OR = 0.31; 95 % CI = 0.10-0.93; p = 0.04, I2 = 0 %] were satisfied by single-chamber pacing.

Conclusion

This study concluded that neither single-chamber nor dual-chamber pacemakers are superior to each other, but they are unique in their own ways as the results of this study manifest remarkable reduction in atrial fibrillation rates and pneumothorax using dual-chamber and single-chamber pacemakers respectively.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

Comparison of Global Longitudinal Strain in Dual-chamber versus Ventricular Pacemaker in Complete Heart Block

Context

Bradycardia caused by total atrioventricular block (TAVB) is treated by implantation of permanent pacemakers (PPMs) in either dual-chamber (DDD) versus ventricular (VVI) pacing modes. DDD is considered a more physiological pacing mode than VVI as it avoids atrioventricular dyssynchrony. However, previous trials have failed to demonstrate the superiority of DDD in improving quality of life and morbidity.

Aims

This study aims to provide postpacemaker function of the left ventricle (LV) measured with global longitudinal strain (GLS), in TAVB patients.

Settings and Design

This is a comparative study; samples included in the study are adult TAVB patients undergoing PPM implantation, without significant heart function, and structural abnormality. Echocardiographic parameters are obtained before, after 1 month, and after 3 months post-PPM.

Subjects and Methods

A total of 98 TAVB patients undergoes PPM implantation during the study period, 55 patients were excluded, and in the end, only 43 patients fulfill the inclusion criteria.

Statistical Analysis Used

Baseline data between DDD and VVI are compared using unpaired t-test. Statistical significance 1 month post-PPM and 3 months post-PPM is analyzed using paired t-test.

Results

There were no significant differences between both groups at baseline. However, significant GLS changes are observed 1 month after PPM in the VVI group (P = 0.002), but no significant change was observed in the DDD group even after 3 months (P = 0.055).

Conclusions

In our study, we conclude that DDD is superior in maintaining LV function in the short term in TAVB patients after PPM implantation.

2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.

2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.

Slittable sheath supported right ventricular pacing lead implantation in persistent left superior vena cava with absent right superior vena cava: a case report

BACKGROUND

Persistent left superior vena cava (PLSVC) is the most common variant of systemic venous drainage. In the absence of the right superior vena cava (RSVC), implantation of a right ventricular pacing lead may be challenging. Therefore specific implantation techniques and experiences in PLSVC are worth reporting.

CASE PRESENTATION

We present a case report of a 90-year-old Caucasian female patient with PLSVC during single chamber pacemaker implantation due to the third-degree atrioventricular block. With common implantation techniques, we did not even reach the right ventricle. Therefore slittable CPS Direct ™ Universal sheath was employed to overcome the acute angle from PLSVC to tricuspid valve and ensure more fixation stability for longer 100-cm right ventricular lead placement.

CONCLUSION

This case demonstrates safe implantation of 100-cm long right ventricular bipolar active fixation pacing lead using common slittable CPS Direct ™ Universal sheath after failed attempts with "C" and "J" stylet shaped electrode. This sheath provides different angle towards tricuspid valve and more fixation stability in patient with PLSVC and absent connection to right atrium.

Comparison of first- and second-generation leadless pacemakers in patients with sinus rhythm and complete atrioventricular block

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy and safety of leadless cardiac pacemakers (LPMs) as an alternative to conventional transvenous cardiac pacing have been largely reported. The first generation of the MicraTM transcatheter pacing system (VR; Medtronic) was able to provide single-chamber VVI(R) pacing mode only, with a potential risk of pacemaker syndrome in sinus rhythm patients. A second-generation system (AV) now provides atrioventricular synchrony through atrial mechanical (Am) sensing capability (VDD mode).

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare VR and AV systems in sinus rhythm patients with chronic ventricular pacing (Vp) for complete atrioventricular block.

METHODS

All consecutive patients implanted with an LPM in our department for complete atrioventricular block were retrospectively screened. Patients with atrial fibrillation, sinus dysfunction, or Vp burden <20% at 1 month postimplantation were excluded. Patients were systematically followed with a visit at 1 month, and then at least once a year.

RESULTS

A total of 93 patients-45 VR (2015-2020) and 48 AV (2020-2021)-were included. VR and AV patients had similar baseline characteristics, except for VR patients being older (80 ± 8 vs. 77 ± 9 years, p = 0.049). The mean Vp burden was 77% in the VR and 82% in the AV group (p = 0.38). In AV patients, the median AV synchronous beats rate was 78%, with 65% having a >66% rate. An E/A ratio <1.2 as measured on echocardiography was the only independent predictor of accurate atrial mechanical tracking (p = 0.01). One-year survival rate was similar in both groups. Five patients in the VR and 0 in the AV group eventually developed pacemaker syndrome within 1 year post-implantation (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In sinus rhythm patients with chronic Vp for complete atrioventricular block implanted with an LPM, the atrial mechanical sensing algorithm allowed significant atrioventricular synchrony in most patients and was associated with no occurrence of-otherwise rare-pacemaker syndrome.

Paradigm Shifts in Cardiac Pacing: Where Have We Been and What Lies Ahead?

The history of cardiac pacing dates back to the 1930s with externalized pacing and has evolved to incorporate transvenous, multi-lead, or even leadless devices. Annual implantation rates of cardiac implantable electronic devices have increased since the introduction of the implantable system, likely related to expanding indications, and increasing global life expectancy and aging demographics. Here, we summarize the relevant literature on cardiac pacing to demonstrate the enormous impact it has had within the field of cardiology. Further, we look forward to the future of cardiac pacing, including conduction system pacing and leadless pacing strategies.

EHRA expert consensus document on the management of arrhythmias in frailty syndrome, endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), Latin America Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS), and Cardiac Arrhythmia Society of Southern Africa (CASSA)

There is an increasing proportion of the general population surviving to old age with significant chronic disease, multi-morbidity, and disability. The prevalence of pre-frail state and frailty syndrome increases exponentially with advancing age and is associated with greater morbidity, disability, hospitalization, institutionalization, mortality, and health care resource use. Frailty represents a global problem, making early identification, evaluation, and treatment to prevent the cascade of events leading from functional decline to disability and death, one of the challenges of geriatric and general medicine. Cardiac arrhythmias are common in advancing age, chronic illness, and frailty and include a broad spectrum of rhythm and conduction abnormalities. However, no systematic studies or recommendations on the management of arrhythmias are available specifically for the elderly and frail population, and the uptake of many effective antiarrhythmic therapies in these patients remains the slowest. This European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) consensus document focuses on the biology of frailty, common comorbidities, and methods of assessing frailty, in respect to a specific issue of arrhythmias and conduction disease, provide evidence base advice on the management of arrhythmias in patients with frailty syndrome, and identifies knowledge gaps and directions for future research.

Single-lead VDD pacing: a literature review on short-term and long-term performance

INTRODUCTION

VDD pacing system was introduced more than 30 years ago. Its use is considered by the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines on cardiac pacing as a potential alternative to dual chambers system for patients with atrioventricular block and normal sinus node function.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, we performed a narrative review of current literature in order to identify the strengths and weaknesses of this pacing system. VDD system allows the maintenance of AV synchronous pacing and its hemodynamic advantages. Some disadvantages may be related to the non-negligible incidence of atrial undersensing and the possible subsequent need for upgrade to DDD system. On the other hand, shorter implantation time and lower complications rate may be advantages.

EXPERT OPINION

In the modern pacing era, VDD pacing system struggles to find its own space. However, it may still be considered as a valuable alternative to a dual-chamber pacemaker for selected patients, in specific clinical scenarios.

Conduction system pacing: Current status and prospects

Conduction system pacing (CSP), including His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), is the most physiological of all pacing modalities for ventricular capture and a potential alternative to right ventricular pacing. It induces electrical and mechanical dyssynchrony, resulting in left ventricular dysfunction, heart failure hospitalization, and atrial arrhythmia. CSP activates the normal conduction system and restores ventricular synchrony. In 2000, HBP was first performed as permanent ventricular pacing, which improved left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The feasibility of permanent HBP has already been demonstrated in patients with bradycardia, although a high capture threshold and limited efficacy for infra-Hisian conduction diseases remain critical issues. The LBBAP is an alternative pacing form that overcomes the limitations of the HBP. A lower capture threshold was obtained at implantation and preserved during the follow-up period in patients with LBBAP. Cardiac resynchronization therapy with HBP or LBBAP may provide better synchronization than the traditional biventricular pacing. Hybrid therapy utilizing HBP or LBBAP in combination with left ventricular pacing has been introduced to treat patients with heart failure. In this review, we have focused on the clinical implications, limitations, and a literature review on CSP.

Adverse effects of right ventricular pacing on cardiac function: prevalence, prevention and treatment with physiologic pacing

Right ventricular (RV) pacing is the main treatment modality for patients with advanced atrioventricular (AV) block. Chronic RV pacing can cause cardiac systolic dysfunction and heart failure (HF). In this review, we discuss studies that have shown deleterious effects of chronic RV pacing on systolic cardiac function causing pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PiCM), heart failure (HF), HF hospitalization, atrial fibrillation (AF) and cardiac mortality. RV apical pacing is the most widely used and studied. Adverse effects of RV pacing appear to be directly related to pacing burden and are worse in patients with pre-existing left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. Chronic RV pacing is also associated with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Mechanisms, risk factors, clinical and echocardiographic features, and strategies to minimize RV pacing-induced cardiac dysfunction are discussed in light of the latest data. Studies on biventricular (Bi-V) pacing upgrade in patients who develop RV PiCM, use of alternate RV pacing sites, de novo Bi-V pacing, and physiologic pacing using HIS bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle area (LBBA) pacing in patients with an anticipated high RV pacing burden are discussed.

The need for a subsequent transvenous system in patients implanted with subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

BACKGROUND

The absence of pacing capabilities may reduce the appeal of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) devices for patients at risk for conduction disorders or with antitachycardia pacing (ATP)/cardiac resynchronization (CRT) requirements. Reports of rates of S-ICD to transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (TV-ICD) system switch in real-world scenarios are limited.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the need for a subsequent transvenous (TV) device in patients implanted with an S-ICD and its predictors.

METHODS

All patients implanted with an S-ICD were enrolled from the multicenter, real-world iSUSI (International SUbcutaneouS Implantable cardioverter defibrillator) Registry. The need for a TV device and its clinical reason, and appropriate and inappropriate device therapies were assessed. Logistic regression with Firth penalization was used to assess the association between baseline and procedural characteristics and the overall need for a subsequent TV device.

RESULTS

A total of 1509 patients were enrolled (age 50.8 ± 15.8 years; 76.9% male; 32.0% ischemic; left ventricular ejection fraction 38% [30%-60%]). Over 26.5 [13.4-42.9] months, 155 (10.3%) and 144 (9.3%) patients experienced appropriate and inappropriate device therapies, respectively. Forty-one patients (2.7%) required a TV device (13 bradycardia; 10 need for CRT; 10 inappropriate shocks). Body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m2 and chronic kidney disease (CKD) were associated with need for a TV device (odds ratio [OR] 2.57 [1.37-4.81], P = .003; and OR 2.67 [1.29-5.54], P = .008, respectively).

CONCLUSION

A low rate (2.7%) of conversion from S-ICD to a TV device was observed at follow-up, with need for antibradycardia pacing, ATP, or CRT being the main reasons. BMI >30 kg/m2 and CKD predicted all-cause need for a TV device.

Feasibility of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Combined with Atrioventricular Node Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Pacemaker implantation combined with atrioventricular node ablation (AVNA) could be a practical choice for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with heart failure (HF). Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) has been widely reported.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the safety and efficacy of LBBaP combined with AVNA in AF patients with HF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Fifty-six AF patients with HF attempted LBBaP and AVNA from January 2019 to December 2020. Standard LBBaP was achieved in forty-six patients, and another ten received left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP). The cardiac function indexes and pacemaker parameters were evaluated at baseline, and we conducted a 1-month and 1-year follow-up.

RESULT

At the time of implantation and 1-month and 1-year follow-up, QRS duration of LVSP group was longer than that of LBBaP group. The pacemaker parameters remained stable in both the LBBaP and LVSP groups. At 1-month and 1-year follow-up after LBBaP and AVNA, left ventricular ejection fraction, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, and NYHA classification continued to improve. Baseline left ventricular ejection fraction and QRS duration change at implantation can predict the magnitude of improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction at 1-year after LBBaP. Baseline right atrial left-right diameter, the degree of tricuspid regurgitation, and interventricular septum thickness may be the factors affecting the success of LBBaP.

CONCLUSION

LBBaP combined with AVNA is safe and effective for patients with AF and HF. Baseline right atrial left-right diameter, the degree of tricuspid regurgitation, and interventricular septum thickness may be the factors affecting the success of LBBaP.

Clinical Outcomes of Non-Atrial Fibrillation Bradyarrhythmias Treated With a Ventricular Demand Leadless Pacemaker Compared With an Atrioventricular Synchronous Transvenous Pacemaker - A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Implanting a ventricular demand leadless pacemaker (VVI-LPM) for patients with non-atrial fibrillation (AF) bradyarrhythmias such as sick sinus syndrome (SSS) or high-grade (i.e., second- or third-degree) atrioventricular (AV) block is not recommended unless they have limited vascular access or a high infection risk; nevertheless, an unexpectedly high number of VVI-LPM implantations have been performed. This study investigated the clinical outcomes of these unusual uses.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This study retrospectively analyzed 193 patients who were newly implanted with a VVI-LPM or an atrioventricular synchronous transvenous pacemaker (DDD-TPM) for non-AF bradyarrhythmias at a high-volume center in Japan from September 2017 to September 2020. Propensity score-matching produced 2 comparable cohorts treated with a VVI-LPM or DDD-TPM (n=58 each). Each group had 20 (34%) patients with SSS and 38 (66%) patients with high-grade AV block. During a median follow up of 733 (interquartile range 395-997) days, there were no significant differences between the VVI-LPM and DDD-TPM groups regarding late device-related adverse events (0% vs. 4%, log-rank P=0.155), but the VVI-LPM group had a significantly increased readmission rate for heart failure (HF) (29% vs. 2%, log-rank P=0.001) and a tendency to have higher all-cause mortality (28% vs. 4%, log-rank P=0.059).

CONCLUSIONS

The implantation of a VVI-LPM for non-AF bradyarrhythmias increased the incidence of HF-related rehospitalization at the mid-term follow up compared to the use of a DDD-TPM.

Mid- to Long-Term Clinical and Echocardiographic Effects of Post-procedural Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Aims

To date, the prognostic effects of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remain controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the mid- (1 year) to long-term (> 1 year) clinical and echocardiographic effects of post-procedural PPI in patients after TAVR.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from the establishment of databases up to 1 December 2021. Studies comparing clinical and echocardiographic outcomes between patients with and without post-TAVR PPI of ≥ 1-year follow-up were collected for further meta-analysis.

Results

A total of 39 studies comprising of 83,082 patients were included in this meta-analysis. At mid-term follow-up (1 year), the pooled results demonstrated a higher risk of all-cause mortality in patients with post-procedural PPI than those without following TAVR (relative risk (RR), 1.17; 95% CI, 1.10–1.24; P < 0.00001). No significant differences were observed in cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.71–1.03; P = 0.10) or heart failure rehospitalization (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.58–1.44; P = 0.69) at 1-year follow-up. At long-term follow-up (> 1 year), post-TAVR PPI had negative effects on all-cause mortality (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.09–1.28; P < 0.0001) and heart failure rehospitalization (RR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.18–1.71; P = 0.0002). There was no difference in long-term cardiovascular mortality between the two groups (RR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.97–1.36; P = 0.11). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was not significantly different at baseline (mean difference, 1.40; 95% CI, –0.13–2.93; P = 0.07), but was significantly lower in the PPI group at 1-year follow-up (mean difference, –3.57; 95% CI, –4.88 to –2.26; P < 0.00001).

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis provides evidence that post-TAVR PPI has negative clinical and echocardiographic effects on patients at mid- to long-term follow-up. Further studies are urgently needed to explore the cause of these complications and optimize the treatment and management of patients requiring permanent pacing after TAVR.

Systematic Review Registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021289935], identifier [CRD42021289935].

Physiologic Pacing Targeting the His Bundle and Left Bundle Branch: a Review of the Literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as a means to preserve or restore physiological ventricular activation via pacing at the His bundle or at more distal targets in the conduction system, including the left bundle branch area. This review examines strengths, weaknesses, and clinical applications of CSP performed via these approaches.

RECENT FINDINGS

His bundle pacing (HBP) has been successfully utilized for standard bradyarrhythmia indications and for QRS correction among patients receiving devices for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Limitations of HBP pacing have included implant complexity and rising pacing thresholds over time. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) appears to deliver similar physiological benefits with shorter implant times and more stable thresholds. More recently, hybrid systems utilizing HBP or LBBAP in combination with left ventricular leads have been used to treat heart failure (HF) patients, and may be useful in multilevel or mixed conduction blocks. There is growing interest in CSP for bradycardia and HF indications, although high quality data with randomized controlled trials are needed to help guide future treatment paradigms.

Short Term Outcomes with Dual Chamber versus Single Chamber Pacing for Atrioventricular Block - A Crossover Trial

A total of 42 patients were studied for primary outcomes of quality of life and 6MWD between VVIR and DDD modes. At end of 2 months after device implantation, randomization was done and the device was programmed to VVIR or DDD modes. At the end of 2 months in this mode QOL and functional was assessed and the patient was switched to other mode. The same protocol was followed at the end of 2 months. We found no difference in functional capacity and quality of life between the two pacing modes. None of the patients developed pacemaker syndrome and there was no preference for any of the modes.

History and evolution of pacing and devices

Cardiac implanted electronic devices are commonplace in the modern practice of cardiology. This article reviews the history of the development of these technologies, with particular reference to the role played by UK physicians and members of the British Cardiovascular Society. Key breakthroughs in the treatment of heart block, ventricular arrhythmia and heart failure are presented in their historical and contemporary context so that the reader might look back on the incredible progress and achievements of the last 100 years and also look forward to what may be achieved in the coming decades.

Single-Chamber Leadless Cardiac Pacemaker in Patients Without Atrial Fibrillation: Findings From Campania Leadless Registry

Introduction:

Little is known about the clinical performance of single-chamber leadless pacemaker (LLPM) in patients without atrial fibrillation (AF) as pacing indication. The aim of this study was to describe the clinical characteristics of patients who underwent single chamber LLPM implantation at three tertiary referral centers and to compare the safety and effectiveness of the single-chamber LLPM among patients with or without AF.

Materials and Methods:

All the consecutive patients who underwent LLPM implantation at three referral centers were analyzed. The indications to LLPM in a real-world setting were described. The study population was divided into two groups according to AF as pacing indication. We assessed the procedure-related complications; moreover, we compared syncope, cardiac hospitalization, pacemaker syndrome, and all-cause death recurrence during the follow-up between patients with and without AF as pacing indication.

Results:

A total of 140 consecutive patients (mean age, 76.7 ± 11.24 years, men 64.3%) were included in the study. The indication to implantation of LLPM was permanent AF with slow ventricular response (n: 67; 47.8%), sinus node dysfunction (n: 25; 17.8%), third atrioventricular block (AVB) (n: 20; 14.2%), second-degree AVB (n: 18; 12.8%), and first degree AVB (n: 10; 7.1%). A total of 7 patients (5%) experienced perioperative complications with no differences between the AF vs. non-AF groups. During a mean follow-up of 606.5 ± 265.9 days, 10 patients (7.7%) died and 7 patients (5.4%) were reported for cardiac hospitalization; 5 patients (3.8%) experienced syncope; no patients showed pacemaker syndrome. No significant differences in the clinical events between the groups were shown. The Kaplan–Meier analysis for the combined endpoints did not show significant differences between the AF and non-AF groups [hazard ratio (HR): 0.94, 95% CI: 0.41–2.16; p = 0.88].

Conclusion:

Our real-world data suggest that LLPM may be considered a safe and reasonable treatment in patients without AF in need of pacing. Further studies are needed to confirm these preliminary results.

Clinical outcomes of left bundle branch area pacing compared to right ventricular pacing: Results from the Geisinger-Rush Conduction System Pacing Registry

BACKGROUND

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has been shown to be a feasible option for patients requiring ventricular pacing.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes between LBBAP and RVP among patients undergoing pacemaker implantation METHODS: This observational registry included patients who underwent pacemaker implantations with LBBAP or RVP for bradycardia indications between April 2018 and October 2020. The primary composite outcome included all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization (HFH), or upgrade to biventricular pacing. Secondary outcomes included the composite endpoint among patients with a prespecified burden of ventricular pacing and individual outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 703 patients met inclusion criteria (321 LBBAP and 382 RVP). QRS duration during LBBAP was similar to baseline (121 ± 23 ms vs 117 ± 30 ms; P = .302) and was narrower compared to RVP (121 ± 23 ms vs 156 ± 27 ms; P <.001). The primary composite outcome was significantly lower with LBBAP (10.0%) compared to RVP (23.3%) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.46; 95%T confidence interval [CI] 0.306-0.695; P <.001). Among patients with ventricular pacing burden >20%, LBBAP was associated with significant reduction in the primary outcome compared to RVP (8.4% vs 26.1%; HR 0.32; 95% CI 0.187-0.540; P <.001). LBBAP was also associated with significant reduction in mortality (7.8% vs 15%; HR 0.59; P = .03) and HFH (3.7% vs 10.5%; HR 0.38; P = .004).

CONCLUSION

LBBAP resulted in improved clinical outcomes compared to RVP. Higher burden of ventricular pacing (>20%) was the primary driver of these outcome differences.

Adopting permanent His bundle pacing: learning curves and medium-term outcomes

AIMS

This study aims to determine procedural characteristics, acute success rates, and medium-term outcomes of consecutive patients undergoing His bundle pacing (HBP); and learning curves of experienced electrophysiologists adopting HBP.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive HBP patients at three hospitals were recruited. Clinical characteristics, acute procedural details, and medium-term outcomes were extracted from electronic medical records. Two hundred and thirty-three patients [mean age 74.6 ± 10.1 years, 48% female, 68% narrow QRS, 71% normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), 55.8% atrioventricular block] underwent HBP. Acute procedural success was 81.1% (mean procedural and fluoroscopic times of 105.5 ± 36.5 and 13.8 ± 9.3 min). Broad QRS was associated with lower HBP success (odds ratio 0.39, P = 0.02). Fluoroscopic and procedural times decreased and plateaued after 30-40 cases per operator. Implant HBP threshold was 1.3 ± 0.7 V at 1.0 ± 0.2 ms and R wave was 5.0 ± 3.9 mV. During follow-up, loss of HBP occurred in a further 12.4% and 11.3% of patients experienced a ≥1 V increase in HBP threshold. Five (2.6%) patients required HBP revision for pacing difficulties. About 8.6% of patients had a >50% decrease in R wave but lead revision for sensing issues was not necessary. On an intention to treat basis, 56.7% of patients in whom HBP was attempted had persisting HBP capture and thresholds of <2 V.

CONCLUSION

Physicians adopting HBP should be cognizant of the learning curve and preferentially select non-dependent patients with normal QRS and LVEF, to minimize risk of lead revision. Further rises in HBP threshold may increase battery drain and need for reoperations, important considerations when choosing HBP for cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Audit of data redaction practices in NICE technology appraisals from 1999 to 2019

OBJECTIVES

To assess the extent and type of data redaction in all active technology appraisals (TA) and highly specialised technology (HST) evaluations issued by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) from its conception of the institute to September 2019. To propose policy recommendations for transparency.

METHODS

Structured audit to establish extent of data redaction-proportion of appraisals and specific data categories and assess redaction by: indication, appraisal process, manufacturer, type of data-price, adverse events (AEs), clinical (excluding AEs), incremental quality-adjusted life-years. Longitudinal analysis over 20 years.

RESULTS

All TAs with available documentation and active recommendations (n=408) and HSTs (n=10) published from March 2000 to 11 September 2019 have been assessed for data redaction. Overall, 333 TAs (81.6%) have data redaction, 86 (25.8%) of them are heavily redacted. Clinical data (excluding AEs) are redacted in 268 (65.7%) appraisals, AE data in 128 (31.4%), price in 238 (58.3%). In total, 87% of oncology appraisals have redacted data vs 78% of non-oncology appraisals. 91% of single TAs have redacted data vs 59% of multiple TAs. 25% of final guidance documents (e.g. Final Appraisal Determination - FAD) do not report one or more instance of clinical data. Data redaction increased substantially over time, and is currently at its highest level with 100% of TAs having at least some data redaction in 2019/2020, 96% of appraisals in 2018/2019% and 94% of appraisals in 2017/2018. All 10 HST evaluations have redacted data, with 4 of them being heavily redacted.

CONCLUSIONS

Documents supporting NICE TA and HST recommendations are significantly redacted, thereby concealing clinical and economic data of importance to patients, clinicians and researchers. Documents remain redacted on the NICE website for years. Policy change is required to ensure transparency of data underpinning NICE's decisions.

Patient with sick sinus syndrome and implanted dual-chamber pacemaker with reduced P-wave duration following low interatrial septal pacing: Case report

INTRODUCTION

A dual-chamber pacemaker (DDD/R) for a sinus node disease is sometimes referred to as a physiological pacemaker as it maintains atrioventricular synchrony, however several clinical trials have proved its inferiority to a nonphysiological single-chamber ventricular back-up pacing.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A subject of the study is a 74-year-old woman with a sick sinus syndrome (SSS) and a previously implanted physiological DDD/R pacemaker. The SSS was diagnosed because of patient's very slow sinus rhythm of about 36 bpm, and due to several episodes of dizziness. After the DDD/R implantation the percentage of atrial pacing approached 100%, with almost none ventricular pacing.

DIAGNOSES

Sick sinus syndrome, complete Bachmann's bundle block, atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter.

INTERVENTIONS

The patient was previously implanted with a physiological DDD/R pacemaker. Several years after the implantation, the atrial fibrillation was diagnosed and the pulmonary vein isolation was then performed by cryoablation. During the follow-up after pulmonary vein isolation, the improvement of mitral filling parameters was assessed using echocardiography. Shortly thereafter the patient developed the persistent paroxysm of a typical atrial flutter which was successfully terminated using a radiofrequency ablation. No recurrence thereof has been observed ever since (24 months).

OUTCOMES

The atrial electrode of the pacing system was implanted within the low interatrial septal region that resulted in a reduced P-wave duration compared to native sinus rhythm P-waves. The said morphology was deformed because of the complete Bachmann bundle block. That approach, despite a nonphysiological direction of an atrial activation, yielded relatively short P-waves (paced P-wave: 179 ms vs intrinsic sinus P-wave: 237 ms). It also contributed to a significantly shorter PR interval (paced PR: 204 ms vs sinus rhythm PR: 254 ms).

CONCLUSIONS

The authors took into consideration different aspects of alternative right atrial pacing sites. This report has shown that in some patients with a sinus node disease, low interatrial septal pacing can reduce the P-wave duration but does not prevent from the development of atrial arrhythmias.

Leadless pacemaker versus transvenous single-chamber pacemaker therapy: peri-procedural aspects, utilization of medical resources and patient acceptance

BACKGROUND

Leadless pacemaker (L-PM) have been developed in order to overcome the lead- and pocket-related complications associated with transvenous pacemaker (T-PM). The impact of L-PM implantation on the utilization of medical resources, patient comfort and therapy acceptance could differ from that of T-PM.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Prospective, single-center study enrolling 243 consecutive patients undergoing PM implantation. Propensity matching for baseline characteristics yielded 77 matched pairs. Procedural data, patient acceptance (assessed by Florida Patient Acceptance Survey, FPAS) and quality of life (QoL) (assessed at the baseline, 1 week, 3 and 6 months) were compared between the two groups (L-PM and T-PM).

RESULTS

The implantation procedure was longer in L-PM than T-PM patients (42.2±16.3 vs. 28.9±11.9 minutes; p<0.001). L-PM was associated with lower intra- and post-operative pain intensity (all p<0.05), shorter hospitalization (3.2±0.5 vs. 3.5±1.1 days; p=0.034), greater patient acceptance (FPAS score: 58.7±7.1 vs. 40.5±4.1; p<0.001), and better QoL on both physical and mental health scales (all p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although L-PM implantation takes longer than T-PM, it is better tolerated and accepted by patients and is associated with a better QoL.

Effects of cardiac pacemakers on left ventricular volumes and function assessed by 3D echocardiography, Doppler method, and global longitudinal strain

Background

Many previous studies reported the negative effects of right ventricular (RV) pacing on the left ventricular (LV) structure and ejection fraction. Studying pacing hemodynamics is essential to understand these detrimental effects. In this study, we tried to understand RV pacing effects on LV volumes and function using advanced tools like 3D echo and global longitudinal strain (GLS). This was a prospective study of 175 consecutive patients (LVEF>50%) presented permanent pacing. Of 175 patients, only 50 patients met study criteria, divided into two groups (single or dual pacing). LV volumes and function were assessed by full-volume 3D echocardiography and GLS before pacing, at 1-week and 6-month post-pacing. Cardiac output (COP) was calculated by pulsed wave Doppler method and 3D echo.

Results

Doppler method results were similar to 3D echo in calculating SV and COP. At 1-week post pacing, both groups showed a significant decrease in SV due to a drop in EDV while ESV did not change significantly. Despite the drop in SV, there was a significant increase in cardiac output (COP) due to achieving higher heart rates post-pacing. There was a significant drop in EF and GLS in both groups.

At 6 months, SV continued to decrease with a corresponding decrease in COP and LVEF. This drop in SV was due to a significant increase in ESV while EDV did not show a significant change at a 6-month follow-up. Also, the drop EF and GLS became more significant.

There were no significant differences between both groups regarding the changes in LV volumes (EDV, ESV, SV), LVEF or GLS throughout the study (pre-pacing, at 1-week and 6-months post pacing). However, dual-chamber pacing group provided higher heart rates and as a result higher COP than the single-chamber group.

Conclusions

RV pacing led to a significant drop in LV COP, ejection fraction (EF), and GLS over short- and long-term duration. Dual chamber pacing provided higher COP than a single chamber pacing. This was due to tracking the S. A node with pacing at higher heart rates not due to an increase in SV and preserving atrioventricular synchrony. Both Doppler method and 3D echo can be used to calculate SV and COP.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43044-021-00138-9.

Impact of a poor functional capacity on the clinical outcomes in patients with a pacemaker implantation -Results from the Japanese Heart Rhythm Society Registry

BACKGROUND

Functional capacity (FC) correlates with mortality in various cardiovascular diseases. The aim of this study was to examine whether cardiac pacemaker implantations improve the FC and affect the prognosis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We prospectively enrolled 621 de novo pacemaker recipients (age 76 ± 9 years, 50.7% male). The FC was assessed by metabolic equivalents (METs) during the implantation and periodically thereafter. The patients were a priori classified into poor FC (<2 METs, n = 40), moderate FC (2 ≤ METs < 4, n = 239), and good FC (≥4 METs, n = 342). Three months after the pacemaker implantation, poor FC or moderate FC patients improved to a good FC by 43%. The distribution of the three FCs remained at those levels until after 1 year of follow-up (P = .18). During a median follow-up of 2.4 years, 71 patients (11%) had cardiovascular hospitalizations and 35 (5.6%) all-cause death. A multivariate Cox analysis revealed that a poor FC at baseline was an independent predictor of both cardiovascular hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] 2.494, P = .012) and all-cause death (HR 3.338, P = .016). One year after the pacemaker implantation, the eight who remained with a poor FC had a high mortality rate of 37.5% (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Approximately half of the poor or moderate FC patients improved to good FC 3 months after the pacemaker implantation. The baseline FC predicted the prognosis, and patients with an improved FC after the pacemaker implantation had a better prognosis.

Predictors of pacing induced left ventricular dysfunction and cardiomyopathy assessed by three-dimensional echocardiography and speckle tracking strain

Background

Long-term RV pacing leads to ventricular dyssynchrony, in the form of LBBB-like morphology, with subsequent detrimental effects on LV structure and function. Three-dimensional echocardiography allowed early detection of volumetric changes associated with PICMP and provided more accurate assessment of mechanical dyssynchrony. Speckle tracking strain is able to identify LV dysfunction even before any reduction in LVEF. Our aim was to study pacing effects on LV function and hemodynamics using 3D echo and speckle tracking strain.

Results

This was a prospective study of 175 consecutive patients without structural heart disease (LVEF > 50%) presented for permanent pacing. Full-volume 3D echocardiography done before implantation, 1 week, and 6 months together with GLS. Patients were followed for 6 months to detect incidence of PIVD (defined as reduction in LVEF > 10% but still above 50%) and PICMP (defined as decrease in LVEF by 10% from baseline in absence of other known causes of cardiomyopathy resulting in EF< 50%). PIVD and PICMP predictors and risk factors were analyzed. Only 50 patients met study criteria. Twenty-five (50%) patients developed LV systolic dysfunction; of these, 19 (38%) developed PIVD and 6 (12%) developed PICMP. Pre-implantation GLS was significantly lower in the 6 patients who subsequently developed PICMP, compared to those who developed PIVD and the preserved EF group (mean GLS − 15.50 vs. − 21.0, − 20.0 respectively; p = 0.005, 0.033, respectively). At 1 week, GLS was significantly lower in the 25 patients who subsequently developed PIVD, compared to those who did not (GLS − 13.0 vs. − 18.0, respectively; p = 0.002). A reduction of baseline GLS by 15% or more at 1 week was associated with the development of PIVD and PICMP (p = < 0.001). A wider native QRS complex was associated with PIVD and PICMP (p = 0.008, 0.018, respectively). The other predictors were found non-significant.

Conclusion

PICMP may be more common than previously reported and it may occur shortly after implantation. Pre-implantation GLS is a sensitive parameter for PICMP. One-week GLS, pre-implantation QRS complex width are early predictors for PICMP and PIVD before any reduction in EF.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43044-021-00136-x.

Conventional single-chamber pacemakers versus transcatheter pacing systems in a "real world" cohort of patients: A comparative prospective single-center study

Purpose

Despite the developments in conventional transvenous pacemakers (VVI-PM), the procedure is still associated with significant complications. Although there are no prospective clinical trials that compared VVI-PM with transcatheter pacemaker systems (TPS).

Methods

This is a prospective, observational, single-center study that included all patients with an indication for a single-chamber pacemaker implant within a 4-year period. All clinical, ECG and echocardiographic characteristics at implant, electrical parameters, associated complications and mortality were analyzed. A Cox survival model and a Bayesian cohort analysis were performed for differences in complication rates between groups.

Results

There were 443 patients included (198 TPS and 245 VVI-PM). The mean age was 81.5 years (TPS group, 79.2 ± 6.6 years; VVI-PM group, 83.5 ± 8.9 years). There was a male predominance in TPS group (123, 62.1% vs. 67, 27.3%; p < 0.001). The presence of systolic dysfunction and renal insufficiency were more frequent in VVI-PM group than in TPS patients. Mean follow-up was 22.3 ± 15.9 months. In a multivariable paired data the TPS group presented fewer complications than VVI-PM group (HR = 0.39 [0.15–0.98], p-value 0.013), but major complications were not different (6, 3% vs 14, 5.6% respectively, p = 0.1761). There was no difference in the mortality rate between the groups. The TPS group had less risk than VVI-PM group to have a complication, with a 96% of probability.

Conclusions

TPS patients had a lower overall complication rate than VVI-PM patients including matched-pair samples using a Bayesian analysis. These results confirm the safety profile of TPS in clinical practice.

Cardiac Stimulation in the Third Millennium: Where Do We Head from Here?

Over the years, pacemakers have evolved from a life-saving tool to prevent asystole to a device to treat heart rhythm disorders and heart failure, aiming at improving both cardiac function and clinical outcomes. Cardiac stimulation nowadays aims to correct the electrophysiologic roots of mechanical inefficiency in different structural heart diseases. This has led to awareness of the concealed risks of customary cardiac pacing that can inadvertently cause atrioventricular and inter-/intra-ventricular dyssynchrony, and has promoted the development of new pacing modalities and the use of stimulation sites different from the right atrial appendage and the right ventricular apex. The perspective of truly physiologic pacing is the leading concept of the continued research in the past 30 years, which has made cardiac stimulation procedure more sophisticated and challenging. In this article, we analyze the emerging evidence in favor of the available strategies to achieve an individualized physiologic setting in bradycardia pacing.

Pacing devices to treat bradycardia: current status and future perspectives

Introduction: Cardiac stimulation evolved from life-saving devices to prevent asystole to the treatment of heart rhythm disorders and heart failure, capable of remote patient and disease-progression monitoring. Cardiac stimulation nowadays aims to correct the electrophysiologic roots of mechanical inefficiency in different structural heart diseases.Areas covered: Clinical experience, as per available literature, has led to awareness of the concealed risks of customary cardiac pacing, that can inadvertently cause atrio-ventricular and inter/intra-ventricular dyssynchrony. New pacing modalities have emerged, leading to a new concept of what truly represents 'physiologic pacing' beyond maintenance of atrio-ventricular coupling. In this article we will analyze the emerging evidence in favor of the available strategies to achieve an individualized physiologic setting in bradycardia pacing, and the hints of future developments.Expert opinion: 'physiologic stimulation' technologies should evolve to enable an effective and widespread adoption. In one way new guiding catheters and the adoption of electrophysiologic guidance and non-fluoroscopic lead implantation are needed to make His-Purkinje pacing successful and effective at long term in a shorter procedure time; in the other way leadless stimulation needs to upgrade to a superior physiologic setting to mimic customary DDD pacing and possibly His-Purkinje pacing.

Patient selection, pacing indications, and subsequent outcomes with de novo leadless single-chamber VVI pacing

AIMS

Patient selection is a key component of securing optimal patient outcomes with leadless pacing. We sought to describe and compare patient characteristics and outcomes of Micra patients with and without a primary pacing indication associated with atrial fibrillation (AF) in the Micra IDE trial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The primary outcome (risk of cardiac failure, pacemaker syndrome, or syncope related to the Micra system or procedure) was compared between successfully implanted patients from the Micra IDE trial with a primary pacing indication associated with AF or history of AF (AF group) and those without (non-AF group). Among 720 patients successfully implanted with Micra, 228 (31.7%) were in the non-AF group. Reasons for selecting VVI pacing in non-AF patients included an expectation for infrequent pacing (66.2%) and advanced age (27.2%). More patients in the non-AF group had a condition that precluded the use of a transvenous pacemaker (9.6% vs. 4.7%, P = 0.013). Atrial fibrillation patients programmed to VVI received significantly more ventricular pacing compared to non-AF patients (median 67.8% vs. 12.6%; P < 0.001). The overall occurrence of the composite outcome at 24 months was 1.8% with no difference between the AF and non-AF groups (hazard ratio 1.36, 95% confidence interval 0.45-4.2; P = 0.59).

CONCLUSION

Nearly one-third of patients selected to receive Micra VVI therapy were for indications not associated with AF. Non-AF VVI patients required less frequent pacing compared to patients with AF. Risks associated with VVI therapy were low and did not differ in those with and without AF.

Outcomes of single‑lead VDD pacemakers in atrioventricular blocks: The OSCAR study

BACKGROUND

VDD pacemakers are regarded as a second choice in patients with atrio-ventricular blocks mainly due to the potential failure of atrial sensing, leading to a loss of atrio-ventricular synchrony. This single-centre study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of loss of atrial sensing and its potential determinants in patients with VDD pacemakers.

METHOD

142 patients with an implanted VDD device underwent long-term follow-up with clinical evaluation, electrocardiogram, device interrogation and echocardiogram.

RESULTS

Over a long follow-up period [median 110 (68-156) months], 17 patients (12%) in sinus rhythm presented loss of atrial sensing. This was most often intermittent, but three patients required a permanent switch to VVI mode. ECG showed higher prevalence of interatrial blocks (50% vs 26.6%, p = 0.057) and longer P wave duration (116 ± 19 vs 105 ± 15 ms, p = 0.019) in patients with loss of atrial sensing. Echocardiography revealed larger left atrial (LA) volumes (p < 0.05) in patients with loss of atrial sensing, and lower LA ejection fraction (0.40 vs 0.47, p = 0.0037) and expansion index (0.63 ± 0.26 vs 0.90 ± 0.31, p = 0.003). P wave duration on ECG proved to be independently associated with loss of atrial sensing on multivariable analysis (OR 1.062, 95% CI 1.015-1.110; p = 0.008). The prevalence of atrial fibrillation and subsequent switch to VVI mode was high (16%).

CONCLUSIONS

In the long-term follow-up, the loss of atrial sensing is present in 12% of patients with implanted VDD pacemakers. ECG and echocardiographic parameters may serve as screening tools for the detection of atrial myopathy which is associated with the loss of atrial sensing.