EHRA expert consensus statement and practical guide on optimal implantation technique for conventional pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), and the Latin-American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS)

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.

Left bundle branch area versus conventional pacing after transcatheter valve implant for aortic stenosis: the LATVIA study

BACKGROUND

Atrioventricular block (AVB) is a frequent complication in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Right apex ventricular pacing (RVP) represents the standard treatment but may induce cardiomyopathy over the long term. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a promising alternative, minimizing the risk of desynchrony. However, available evidence with LBBAP after TAVI is still low.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility and safety of LBBAP for AVB post-TAVI compared with RVP.

METHODS

Consecutive patients developing AVB early after TAVI were enrolled between 1 January 2022 and 31 December 2022 at three high-volume hospitals and received LBBAP or RVP. Data on procedure and at short-term follow-up (at least 3 months) were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients (61% men, mean age 83 ± 6 years) were included; 20 patients (53%) received LBBAP. Procedural success was obtained in all patients according to chosen pacing strategy. Electrical pacing performance at implant and after a mean follow-up of 4.2 ± 2.8 months was clinically equivalent for both pacing modalities. In the LBBAP group, procedural time was longer (70 ± 17 versus 58 ± 15 min in the RVP group, P  = 0.02) and paced QRS was shorter (120 ± 19 versus 155 ± 12 ms at implant, P  < 0.001; 119 ± 18 versus 157 ± 9 ms at follow-up, P  < 0.001). Complication rates did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In patients with AVB after TAVI, LBBAP is feasible and safe, resulting in a narrow QRS duration, either acutely and during the follow-up, compared with RVP. Further studies are needed to evaluate if LBBAP reduces pacing-induced cardiomyopathy in this clinical setting.

[Treatment with cardiac electronic implantable devices]

Cardiac device therapy provides not only treatment options for bradyarrhythmia but also advanced treatment for heart failure and preventive measures against sudden cardiac death. In heart failure treatment it enables synergistic reverse remodelling and reduces pharmacological side effects. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has revolutionized the treatment of reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and left bundle branch block by decreasing the mortality and morbidity with improvement of the quality of life and resilience. Conduction system pacing (CSP) as an alternative method of physiological stimulation can improve heart function and reduce the risk of pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy. Leadless pacers and subcutaneous/extravascular defibrillators offer less invasive options with lower complication rates. The prevention of infections through preoperative and postoperative strategies enhances the safety of these therapies.

Atrioventricular optimization improves cardiac resynchronization response in patients with long interventricular electrical delays: A pooled analysis of the SMART-AV and SMART-CRT trials

BACKGROUND

The utility of atrioventricular (AV) optimization (AVO) algorithms remains in question. A substudy of the SMART-AV trial found that patients with prolonged interventricular delays ≥70 ms were more likely to benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with AVO. The SMART-CRT trial evaluated AVO on the basis of these results, but the study was underpowered.

OBJECTIVE

To increase statistical power, data from SMART-AV patients meeting the inclusion criterion of interventricular delay ≥70 ms were pooled with data from SMART-CRT to reassess AVO.

METHODS

SMART-CRT and SMART-AV were prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trials. Patients in both studies were randomized to be programmed with an AVO algorithm (SmartDelay) or fixed AV delay (120 ms). Paired echocardiograms obtained at baseline and 6 months were compared, with CRT response defined as ≥15% reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume.

RESULTS

A total of 451 complete patient data sets were pooled and analyzed. The baseline demographics between studies did not differ statistically in terms of age, sex, left ventricular ejection fraction, or left ventricular end-systolic volume. The AVO group had a greater proportion of CRT responders (SmartDelay, 73.9%; fixed, 63.1%; P = .014) and greater changes in measures of reverse remodeling. SmartDelay patients with a recommended sensed AV delay outside the nominal range (100-120 ms) had 2.3 greater odds of CRT response than fixed AV delay patients.

CONCLUSION

Greater CRT response and measures of reverse remodeling were observed in patients with SmartDelay enabled vs a fixed AV delay. This study supports the use of SmartDelay in patients with a CRT indication and interventricular delay ≥70 ms.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV REGISTRATION

NCT00677014 and NCT03089281.

National Tunisian Study of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: Design and Protocol for a Nationwide Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

In Tunisia, the number of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is increasing, owing to the increase in patient life expectancy and expanding indications. Despite their life-saving potential and a significant reduction in population morbidity and mortality, their increased numbers have been associated with the development of multiple early and late complications related to vascular access, pockets, leads, or patient characteristics.

OBJECTIVE

The study aims to identify the rate, type, and predictors of complications occurring within the first year after CIED implantation. It also aims to describe the demographic and epidemiological characteristics of a nationwide sample of patients with CIED in Tunisia. Additionally, the study will evaluate the extent to which Tunisian electrophysiologists follow international guidelines for cardiac pacing and sudden cardiac death prevention.

METHODS

The Tunisian National Study of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (NATURE-CIED) is a national, multicenter, prospectively monitored study that includes consecutive patients who underwent primary CIED implantation, generator replacement, and upgrade procedure. Patients were enrolled between January 18, 2021, and February 18, 2022, at all Tunisian public and private CIED implantation centers that agreed to participate in the study. All enrolled patients entered a 1-year follow-up period, with 4 consecutive visits at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after CIED implantation. The collected data are recorded electronically on the clinical suite platform (DACIMA Clinical Suite).

RESULTS

The study started on January 18, 2021, and concluded on February 18, 2023. In total, 27 cardiologists actively participated in data collection. Over this period, 1500 patients were enrolled in the study consecutively. The mean age of the patients was 70.1 (SD 15.2) years, with a sex ratio of 1:15. Nine hundred (60%) patients were from the public sector, while 600 (40%) patients were from the private sector. A total of 1298 (86.3%) patients received a conventional pacemaker and 75 (5%) patients received a biventricular pacemaker (CRT-P). Implantable cardioverter defibrillators were implanted in 127 (8.5%) patients. Of these patients, 45 (3%) underwent CRT-D implantation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study will establish the most extensive contemporary longitudinal cohort of patients undergoing CIED implantation in Tunisia, presenting a significant opportunity for real-world clinical epidemiology. It will address a crucial gap in the management of patients during the perioperative phase and follow-up, enabling the identification of individuals at particularly high risk of complications for optimal care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05361759; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05361759.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR1-10.2196/47525.

Delayed development of a huge chest wall hematoma post pacemaker implantation: A case report

An 83-year-old Chinese man presented with a huge left chest wall hematoma and hemorrhagic shock 4 months after permanent pacemaker implantation. Computed Tomography of Angiogram of the left subclavian artery revealed a pseudoaneurysm. He underwent radiologically guided stenting followed by hematoma clearance. It is rare to have delayed formation of pseudoaneurysm at 4 months post pacemaker implantation. Radiologically guided stenting is the preferred treatment, followed by hematoma clearance. It is strongly advised against blind surgery for wound debridement or bleeding detection. Familiarizing with axillary vein anatomy, improving axillary vein cannulation skills, and detecting early complications of artery injury are key strategies in preventing pseudoaneurysm formation post pacemaker implantation.

Predictors of the right ventricular perforation caused by active-fixation pacing and defibrillator leads: A single-centre experience

INTRODUCTION

Active-fixation leads have been associated with higher incidence of cardiac perforation. Large series specifically evaluating radiographic predictors of right ventricular (RV) lead perforation are lacking.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational study including 1691 consecutive patients implanted with an active fixation pacing and defibrillator lead at our institution between January 2015 and January 2021. Fourteen patients who had clinically relevant RV perforation caused by pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads were included in the study.

RESULTS

Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify predictors of RV perforation. In multivariate analysis, lead slack score (odds ratio [OR]: 3.694, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.066-12.807; p = .039), change in lead slack height (OR: 1.218, 95% CI: 1.011-1.467; p = .038) and width (OR: 1.253, 95% CI: 1.120-1.402; p = .001), left ventricular ejection fraction (OR: 0.995, 95% CI: 0.910-1.088; p = .032) were independent predictors of RV perforation.

CONCLUSION

Fluoroscopic predictors of RV perforation associated with RV lead can be easily determined during implantation. Identification of these predictors may prevent the sequelae of RV perforation associated with active-fixation leads.

[Perioperative management for cardiovascular implantable electronic devices]

Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) are an important part of modern cardiology and careful perioperative planning of these procedures is necessary. All information relevant to the indication, the procedure, and the education of the patient must be available prior to surgery. This provides the basis for appropriate device selection. Preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis and perioperative anticoagulation management are essential to prevent infection. After surgery, postoperative monitoring, telemetric control, and device-based diagnostics are required before discharge. These processes need to be adapted to the increasing trend towards outpatient care. This review summarises perioperative management based on practical considerations.

Right ventricular lead perforation with iatrogenic injury to an intercostal artery causing haemothorax after pacemaker implant

A woman in her 80s experienced a life-threatening complication of pacemaker implant consisting of subacute right ventricular lead perforation causing iatrogenic injury to an intercostal artery, resulting in a large haemothorax. A CT scan confirmed active bleeding from the fourth intercostal artery. The patient underwent cardiothoracic surgery via a median sternotomy approach, during which the source of the bleeding was sealed, a new epicardial lead was positioned, and the original lead was extracted. This case emphasises the potentially severe consequences of pacemaker lead perforation and secondary injury to adjacent structures. It underscores the importance of early recognition and timely intervention, preferably in a tertiary specialist unit equipped for cardiothoracic surgery and confirms the value of pacemaker interrogation and CT scans for diagnosis.

Role of routine investigations post cardiac devices implants in detecting peri-procedural complications: A retrospective analysis from a tertiary UK center

BACKGROUND

Peri-procedural complications associated with cardiac implantable electronic devices are not uncommon. European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend device checks of all devices within 72 h of implant. European Heart Rhythm Association expert practical guide on Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) recommend that a chest x-ray (CXR) should be performed within 24 h to rule out pneumothorax and document lead positions. First, the rate of peri-procedural complications associated with CIED implants at our center, as well as patient and/or procedural-related factors that are associated with higher rates of complications, is analyzed. Second, the yield of the guideline-recommended measures in the early detection of peri-procedural complications is examined.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive de novo transvenous device implants at our center in 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients' demographics, types and indications for device therapy, procedural reports, device checks, and CXRs were obtained from the hospital electronic records.

RESULTS

A total of 578 patients (Age 74 ± 16 years, 68% male) were included. All patients had routine post-procedure CXRs and device checks. There were 16 (2.8%) complications; 7 (1.2%) pneumothoraxes, 6 (1%) pericardial effusions, and 3 (0.5%) lead displacements. Procedure time correlated significantly with complications; in uncomplicated cases it was 99 ± 43 min versus 127 ± 50 min in procedures associated with complications (p = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Routine post CIED implantation CXRs can detect early peri-procedural complications, while repeat post mobilization device checks has low yield of detection of complications. The only statistically significant predictor of peri-procedural complications is the duration of the procedure; longer procedures were associated with higher rates of complications.

Ultrasound-Guided Venous Axillary Access Versus Standard Fluoroscopic Technique for Cardiac Lead Implantation: ZEROFLUOROAXI Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Axillary vein puncture (AVP) and cephalic vein surgical cutdown are recommended in international guidelines because of their low risk of pneumothorax and chronic lead complications. Directly visualizing and puncturing the axillary vein under ultrasound guidance reduces radiation exposure, provides direct needle visualization, and lowers periprocedural complications. Our hypothesis is that ultrasound-guided axillary access is safer and more feasible than the standard fluoroscopic technique.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided axillary venous access during cardiac lead implantation for pacemakers (PMs) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantations.

METHODS

Patients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to either axillary venous access under fluoroscopic guidance or ultrasound-guided axillary venous access. The composite outcome, including pneumothorax, hemothorax, inadvertent arterial puncture, pocket hematoma, pocket infection, lead dislodgement, and death, was evaluated 30 days after implantation.

RESULTS

We randomized 270 patients into 2 groups: the standard group for fluoroguided AVP (n = 134) and the experimental group for ultrasound-guided AVP (n = 136). No disparities in baseline characteristics were observed between the groups. The median age of the patients was 81 years, with women comprising 41% of the population. The majority of patients received single- and dual-chamber PMs (87% vs 88%; P = 1.00), and slightly over 10% in both groups received ICDs (13% vs 12%; P = 0.85). In total, we placed 357 leads in PMs and 48 leads in ICDs. Among these, 295 leads were inserted via axillary vein access and 110 via cephalic vein access. Notably, the subclavian vein was never used as a vascular access. The composite outcome was lower in the ultrasound group according to intention-to-treat analysis (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.31-0.99; P = 0.034). The main difference within the composite outcome was the lower incidence of inadvertent axillary arterial puncture in the experimental group (17% vs 6%; P = 0.004). The ultrasound group also exhibited lower total procedural x-ray exposure (10,344 μGy × cm2 vs 7,119 μGy × cm2; P = 0.002) while achieving the same rate of success at the first attempt (61% vs 69%; P = 0.375).

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound-guided AVP is safer than the fluoroscopy-guided approach because it achieves the same rate of acute success while maintaining low total procedural radiation exposure. Ultrasound AVP should be considered the optimal venous access method for cardiac lead implantation. (Ultrasound Guided Axillary Access vs Standard Fluoroscopic Technique for Cardiac Lead Implantation [ZEROFLUOROAXI]; NCT05101720).

Conventional biventricular pacing is still preferred to conduction system pacing for atrioventricular block in patients with reduced ejection fraction and narrow QRS

It is well established that right ventricular pacing is detrimental in patients with reduced cardiac function who require ventricular pacing (VP), and alternatives nowadays are comprised of biventricular pacing (BiVP) and conduction system pacing (CSP). The latter modality is of particular interest in patients with a narrow baseline QRS as it completely avoids, or minimizes, ventricular desynchronization associated with VP. In this article, experts debate whether BiVP or CSP should be used to treat these patients.

Imaging in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: part 2-imaging after device implantation. A clinical consensus statement of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC

Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) improve quality of life and prolong survival, but there are additional considerations for cardiovascular imaging after implantation-both for standard indications and for diagnosing and guiding management of device-related complications. This clinical consensus statement (part 2) from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging, in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association, provides comprehensive, up-to-date, and evidence-based guidance to cardiologists, cardiac imagers, and pacing specialists regarding the use of imaging in patients after implantation of conventional pacemakers, cardioverter defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. The document summarizes the existing evidence regarding the role and optimal use of various cardiac imaging modalities in patients with suspected CIED-related complications and also discusses CRT optimization, the safety of magnetic resonance imaging in CIED carriers, and describes the role of chest radiography in assessing CIED type, position, and complications. The role of imaging before and during CIED implantation is discussed in a companion document (part 1).

Imaging in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: part 1-imaging before and during device implantation. A clinical consensus statement of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC

More than 500 000 cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are implanted in the European Society of Cardiology countries each year. The role of cardiovascular imaging in patients being considered for CIED is distinctly different from imaging in CIED recipients. In the former group, imaging can help identify specific or potentially reversible causes of heart block, the underlying tissue characteristics associated with malignant arrhythmias, and the mechanical consequences of conduction delays and can also aid challenging lead placements. On the other hand, cardiovascular imaging is required in CIED recipients for standard indications and to assess the response to device implantation, to diagnose immediate and delayed complications after implantation, and to guide device optimization. The present clinical consensus statement (Part 1) from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging, in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association, provides comprehensive, up-to-date, and evidence-based guidance to cardiologists, cardiac imagers, and pacing specialists regarding the use of imaging in patients undergoing implantation of conventional pacemakers, cardioverter defibrillators, and resynchronization therapy devices. The document summarizes the existing evidence regarding the use of imaging in patient selection and during the implantation procedure and also underlines gaps in evidence in the field. The role of imaging after CIED implantation is discussed in the second document (Part 2).

Intra-pocket ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture vs. cephalic vein cutdown for cardiac electronic device implantation: the ACCESS trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Intra-pocket ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture (IPUS-AVP) for venous access in implantation of transvenous cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) is uncommon due to the lack of clinical evidence supporting this technique. This study investigated the efficacy and early complications of IPUS-AVP compared to the standard method using cephalic vein cutdown (CVC) for CIED implantation.

METHODS

ACCESS was an investigator-led, interventional, randomized (1:1 ratio), monocentric, controlled superiority trial. A total of 200 patients undergoing CIED implantation were randomized to IPUS-AVP (n = 101) or CVC (n = 99) as a first assigned route. The primary endpoint was the success rate of insertion of all leads using the first assigned venous access technique. The secondary endpoints were time to venous access, total procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, X-ray exposure, and complications. Complications were monitored during a follow-up period of three months after procedure.

RESULTS

IPUS-AVP was significantly superior to CVC for the primary endpoint with 100 (99.0%) vs. 86 (86.9%) procedural successes (P = .001). Cephalic vein cutdown followed by subclavian vein puncture was successful in a total of 95 (96.0%) patients, P = .21 vs. IPUS-AVP. All secondary endpoints were also significantly improved in the IPUS-AVP group with reduction in time to venous access [3.4 vs. 10.6 min, geometric mean ratio (GMR) 0.32 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.28-0.36), P < .001], total procedure duration [33.8 vs. 46.9 min, GMR 0.72 (95% CI 0.67-0.78), P < .001], fluoroscopy time [2.4 vs. 3.3 min, GMR 0.74 (95% CI 0.63-0.86), P < .001], and X-ray exposure [1083 vs. 1423 mGy.cm², GMR 0.76 (95% CI 0.62-0.93), P = .009]. There was no significant difference in complication rates between groups (P = .68).

CONCLUSIONS

IPUS-AVP is superior to CVC in terms of success rate, time to venous access, procedure duration, and radiation exposure. Complication rates were similar between the two groups. Intra-pocket ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture should be a recommended venous access technique for CIED implantation.

Real-world evidence for the use of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in China: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) have been shown to be non-inferior to transvenous ICDs in the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD), but there is still a lack of evidence from clinical trials in China. We investigated whether S‑ICD implantation in the Chinese population is safe and feasible and should be promoted in the future.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing S‑ICD implantation at our center were enrolled in this retrospective study. Data were collected within the median follow-up period of 554 days. Data concerning patient selection, implantation procedures, complications, and episodes of shock were analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 70.2% of all 47 patients (median age = 39 years) were included for secondary prevention of SCD with different etiologies. Vector screening showed that 98% of patients were with > 1 appropriate vector in all postures. An intraoperative defibrillation test was not performed on six patients because of the high risk of disease deterioration, while all episodes of ventricular fibrillation induced post implantation were terminated by one shock. As expected, no severe complications (e.g., infection and device-related complications) were observed, except for one case of delayed healing of the incision. Overall, 15 patients (31.9%) experienced appropriate shocks (AS) with all episodes terminated by one shock. Two patients (4.3%) experienced inappropriate shocks (IAS) due to noise oversensing, resulting in a high Kaplan-Meier IAS-free rate of 95.7%.

CONCLUSION

Based on appropriate patient selection and standardized implantation procedures, this real-world study confirmed the safety and efficacy of S‑ICD in Chinese patients, indicating that it may help to promote the prevention of SCD in China.

A Personalized Approach to the Management of Congestion in Acute Heart Failure

Heart failure (HF) is the common final pathway of several conditions and is characterized by hyperactivation of numerous neurohumoral pathways. Cardiorenal interaction plays an essential role in the progression of the disease, and the use of diuretics is a cornerstone in the treatment of hypervolemic patients, especially in acute decompensated HF (ADHF). The management of congestion is complex and, to avoid misinterpretations and errors, one must understand the interface between the heart and the kidneys in ADHF. Congestion itself may impair renal function and must be treated aggressively. Transitory elevations in serum creatinine during decongestion is not associated with worse outcomes and diuretics should be maintained in patients with clear hypervolemia. Monitoring urinary sodium after diuretic administration seems to improve the response to diuretics as it allows for adjustments in doses and a personalized approach. Adequate assessment of volemia and the introduction and titration of guideline-directed medical therapy are mandatory before discharge. An early visit after discharge is highly recommended, to assess for residual congestion and thus avoid readmissions.

Video-assisted thoracoscopic epicardial pacing: A contemporary overview

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) has revolutionized the approach and management of pulmonary and cardiac diseases, and its applications have significantly expanded in the last two decades. Beyond its established role in thoracic procedures, VATS has also emerged as a valuable technique for various electrophysiological procedures, including pacemaker implantations, ablation procedures, and left atrial appendage exclusion. This paper presents a thorough review of the existing literature on pacing procedures performed using a VATS approach. By analyzing and synthesizing the available studies, we aim to provide an in-depth understanding of the current knowledge and advancements in VATS-based pacing procedures. A key focus of this review is the detailed description of implantation techniques via a VATS approach.

[Venous access routes for cardiac implantable electronic devices]

Various venous access routes in the region of the clavicle are available for cardiac device treatment. After many years of choosing access via the subclavian vein, current data explicitly show that lateral approaches such as preparation of the cephalic vein or puncture of the axillary vein are clearly superior in terms of probe durability and risk of complications. This article describes the preparation and performance of the various access techniques and is intended to provide a practical guide for the work in cardiac pacemaker operations. This work continues a series of articles designed for advanced training in specialized rhythmology.

Cardiac pacing and lead devices management: 25 years of research at EP Europace journal

AIMS

Cardiac pacing represents a key element in the field of electrophysiology and the treatment of conduction diseases. Since the first issue published in 1999, EP Europace has significantly contributed to the development and dissemination of the research in this area.

METHODS

In the last 25 years, there has been a continuous improvement of technologies and a great expansion of clinical indications making the field of cardiac pacing a fertile ground for research still today. Pacemaker technology has rapidly evolved, from the first external devices with limited longevity, passing through conventional transvenous pacemakers to leadless devices. Constant innovations in pacemaker size, longevity, pacing mode, algorithms, and remote monitoring highlight that the fascinating and exciting journey of cardiac pacing is not over yet.

CONCLUSION

The aim of the present review is to provide the current 'state of the art' on cardiac pacing highlighting the most important contributions from the Journal in the field.

Single- Versus Dual-Chamber Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator for Primary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death in the United States

Background Routine addition of an atrial lead during an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death, in patients without pacing indications, was not shown beneficial in contemporary studies. We aimed to investigate the use and safety of single- versus dual-chamber ICD implantations in these patients. Methods and Results Using the National Inpatient Sample database, we identified patients with no pacing indications who underwent primary-prevention ICD implantation in the United States between 2015 and 2019. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, as well as in-hospital complications, were analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of in-hospital complications. An estimated total of 15 940 patients, underwent ICD implantation for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death during the study period, 8860 (55.6%) received a dual-chamber ICD. The mean age was 64 years, and 66% were men. In-hospital complication rates in the dual-chamber ICD and single-chamber ICD group were 12.8% and 10.7%, respectively (P<0.001), driven by increased rates of pneumothorax/hemothorax (4.6% versus 3.4%; P<0.001) and lead dislodgement (3.6% versus 2.3%; P<0.001) in the dual-chamber ICD group. Multivariable analyses confirmed atrial lead addition as an independent predictor for "any complications" (odds ratio [OR], 1.1 [95% CI, 1.0-1.2]), for pneumo/hemothorax (odds ratio, 1.1 [95% CI, 1.0-1.4]), and for lead dislodgement (odds ratio, 1.3 [95% CI, 1.1-1.6]). Conclusions Despite lack of evidence for clinical benefit, dual-chamber ICDs are implanted for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in a majority of patients who do not have pacing indication. This practice is associated with increased risk of periprocedural complications. Avoidance of routine implantation of atrial leads will likely improve safety outcomes.

Combined effects of high atrial septal pacing and reactive atrial antitachycardia pacing for reducing atrial fibrillation in sick sinus syndrome

BACKGROUND

It is unknown whether atrial fibrillation (AF) burden varies by pacing site in patients with reactive atrial antitachycardia pacing (rATP). We aimed to compare AF burden in patients with high atrial septal pacing (HASp) via delivery catheter and right atrial appendage pacing (RAAp) in patients with sick sinus syndrome (SSS).

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 109 patients with a history of paroxysmal AF and SSS who had received dual-chamber pacemaker implantation between January 2017 and December 2019, of whom 39 and 70 patients had HASp and RAAp, respectively. rATP was initiated after a 1-month post-implantation run-in period.

RESULTS

Patients with HASp had a significantly shorter P-wave duration during atrial pacing than those with RAAp (99.3 ± 10.4 vs. 116.0 ± 14.3 ms, p < .001). During the 3-year follow-up period, the incidence of an AF lasting longer than 1 or 7 days was significantly lower (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; p = .016; HR, 0.24; p = .004) than in those with RAAp. The median time of AF/AT per day in the follow-up periods was significantly shorter in the HASp group than in the RAAp group (10 vs. 18 min/day, p = .018). Atrial lead division did not occur in the HASp group during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

HASp via delivery catheter is as safe as RAAp, and HASp combined with rATP is effective for reducing AF burden in patients with SSS and paroxysmal AF.

Axillary vein puncture versus cephalic vein cutdown for cardiac implantable electronic device implantation: A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Cephalic vein cutdown (CVC) and axillary vein puncture (AVP) are both recommended for transvenous implantation of leads for cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Nonetheless, it is still debated which of the two techniques has a better safety and efficacy profile.

METHODS

We systematically searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane electronic databases up to September 5, 2022, for studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of AVP and CVC reporting at least one clinical outcome of interest. The primary endpoints were acute procedural success and overall complications. The effect size was estimated using a random-effect model as risk ratio (RR) and relative 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Overall, seven studies were included, which enrolled 1771 and 3067 transvenous leads (65.6% [n = 1162] males, average age 73.4 ± 14.3 years). Compared to CVC, AVP showed a significant increase in the primary endpoint (95.7 % vs. 76.1 %; RR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.09-1.40; p = .001) (Figure 1). Total procedural time (mean difference [MD]: -8.25 min; 95% CI: -10.23 to -6.27; p < .0001; I2  = 0%) and venous access time (MD: -6.24 min; 95% CI: -7.01 to -5.47; p < .0001; I2  = 0%) were significantly shorter with AVP compared to CVC. No differences were found between AVP and CVC for incidence overall complications (RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.28-1.10; p = .09), pneumothorax (RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.13-4.0; p = .71), lead failure (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.23-1.48; p = .26), pocket hematoma/bleeding (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.15-2.23; p = .43), device infection (RR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.14-6.60; p = .96) and fluoroscopy time (MD: -0.24 min; 95% CI: -0.75 to 0.28; p = .36).

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggests that AVP may improve procedural success and reduce total procedural time and venous access time compared to CVC.

Ultrasound-guided access to the axillary vein for implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The aims of our systematic review were to quantify the expected rate of procedural success, early and late complications during CIED implantation using US-guided puncture of the axillary vein and to perform a meta-analysis of those studies that compared the US technique (intervention) versus conventional techniques (control) in terms of complication rates. MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, and EMBASE were searched for eligible studies. Pooled Odds Ratio (OR) and Pooled Mean Difference (PMD) for each predictor were calculated. The quality of evidence (QOE) was evaluated according to the GRADE guidelines. Thirteen studies were included a total of 2073 patients. The overall success of US-guided venipuncture for CIED implantation was 96.8%. As regards early complications, pneumothorax occurred in 0.19%, arterial puncture in 0.63%, and severe hematoma/bleeding requiring intervention in 1.1%. No cases of hemothorax, brachial plexus, or phrenic nerve injury were reported. As regards late complications, the incidence of pocket infection, venous thromboembolism, and leads dislodgement was respectively 0.4%, 0.8%, and 1.2%. In the meta-analysis (five studies), the intervention group (US-guided venipuncture) had a trend versus a lower likelihood of having a pneumothorax (0.19% vs 0.75%, p = 0.21), pocket hematoma (0.8% vs 1.7%, p = 0.32), infection (0.28% vs 1.05%, p = 0.29) than the control group, but this did not reach statistical significance. The overall QOE was low or very low. In conclusions we found that the US-guided axillary venipuncture for CIEDs implantation was associated with a low incidence of early and late complications and a steep learning curve.

Frame-rate reduction to reduce radiation dose for cardiac device implantation is safe

Background

Radiation exposure to patient and surgeon during cardiac implantable electrical device (CIED) procedures remains a substantial health hazard to date. Advanced technical options for radiation dose reduction often pose considerable financial hurdles. We propose a near-zero cost, low-effort modification to a clinical x-ray system significantly reducing radiation dose during CIED implantation.

Objective

We aim to evaluate a reduced frame rate protocol in CIED implantation for complication rates and reduction in radiation exposure.

Methods

Starting May 2019, the frame rate during CIED implantations at our hospital was halved from 7.5 frames/s to 3.8 frames/s, and no further technical changes were made. During the following year, 264 patients were operated using this protocol and retrospectively compared with 231 cases implanted in the year before the protocol change, totaling 495 cases. Of these, 17%, 63%, and 19% were single-chamber, dual-chamber, or resynchronization devices, respectively. Incidence of complication prior to hospital discharge was considered the primary endpoint of the analysis. Radiation dose and procedural parameters were secondary endpoints.

Results

There was no increase in complications with the reduced frame rate protocol. Regression analysis further supported that the reduced frame rate radiation protocol was not associated with complication rates. Radiation exposure measured as dose area product was significantly reduced by ∼62% (median 369 [interquartile range 154-1207] cGy·cm² via the reduced frame rate protocol vs median 970 [interquartile range 400-1906] cGy·cm² with the standard frame rate; P < 0.01).

Conclusion

A reduction of frame rate during CIED implantation is safe in terms of complication incidence and effective in terms of reducing radiation exposure.

Direct anchoring technique for pacing and defibrillation leads inserted through cephalic vein: insight for a single high-volume center

BACKGROUND

Direct anchoring of PM and ICD leads over cephalic vein body is officially discouraged by manufactures due to a supposed risk of conductor fracture or insulation failure, however careful tightening of anchoring knots can probably prevent lead damage. Direct anchoring (DA) technique is routinely used in our center for all leads inserted by cephalic vein while standard anchoring sleeves are used to secure subclavian leads only. Aim of the study is to assess short- and long-term safety of cephalic direct anchoring technique.

METHODS

All patients undergoing PM and ICD implantation in our center from November 2014 to March 2016 were consecutively enrolled. Primary endpoints were acute lead fracture, lead dislodgement and chronic lead failure. Secondary endpoint was a composite of short-term surgical complications (pocket hematoma, pneumothorax, and pericardial effusion) plus device infections. Subclavian leads secured with sleeve anchoring (SA) were used as control.

RESULTS

A total of 550 leads were implanted in 310 consecutive patients. DA involved 323 leads (59%) while SA was used for 227 (41%). Median follow-up was 50 months (IQR 24-62 months). 17 lead malfunctions (3.1%) were observed during follow-up. No difference was observed between groups (10 DA vs. 7 SP, P=ns). Survival analysis found no difference between groups. Secondary endpoints were not statistically different between groups (5 vs. 1, P=0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Direct anchoring technique of PM and ICD leads is a safe technique and does not increase lead malfunction risk.

Right ventricular function is a predictor for sustained ventricular tachycardia requiring anti-tachycardic pacing in arrhythmogenic ventricular cardiomyopathy: insight into transvenous vs. subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator insertion

AIMS

Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) patients develop ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) responsive to anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP). However, VA episodes have not been characterized in accordance with the device therapy, and with the emergence of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD), the appropriate device prescription in ARVC remains unclear. Study aim was to characterize VA events in ARVC patients during follow-up in accordance with device therapy and elicit if certain parameters are predictive of specific VA events.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a retrospective single-centre study utilizing prospectively collated registry data of ARVC patients with ICDs. Forty-six patients were included [54.0 ± 12.1 years old and 20 (43.5%) secondary prevention devices]. During a follow-up of 12.1 ± 6.9 years, 31 (67.4%) patients had VA events [n = 2, 6.5% ventricular fibrillation (VF), n = 14], 45.2% VT falling in VF zone resulting in ICD shock(s), n = 10, 32.3% VT resulting in ATP, and n = 5, 16.1% patients had both VT resulting in ATP and ICD shock(s). Lead failure rates were high (11/46, 23.9%). ATP was successful in 34.5% of patients. Severely impaired right ventricular (RV) function was an independent predictor of VT resulting in ATP (hazard ratio 16.80, 95% confidence interval 3.74-75.2; P < 0.001) with a high predictive accuracy (area under the curve 0.88, 95%CI 0.76-1.00; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

VA event rates are high in ARVC patients with a majority having VT falling in the VF zone resulting in ICD shock(s). S-ICDs could be of benefit in most patients with ARVC with the absence of severely impaired RV function which has the potential to avoid consequences of the high burden of lead failure.

Impact of peri-procedural management of direct oral anticoagulants on pocket haematoma after cardiac electronic device implantation: the StimAOD multicentre prospective study

AIMS

The study aims to investigate the impact of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) management on the incidence of pocket haematoma in patients undergoing pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

All consecutive patients receiving DOAC and undergoing cardiac electronic device implantation were included in a large multicentre prospective observational study (NCT03879473). The primary endpoint was clinically relevant haematoma within 30 days after implantation. Overall, 789 patients were enrolled [median age 80 (IQR 72-85) years old, 36.4% women, median CHA2DS2-VASc score 4 (IQR 0-8)], of which 632 (80.1%) received a pacemaker implantation. Antiplatelet therapy was combined with DOAC in 146 patients (18.5%). Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were interrupted 52 (IQR 37-62) h before the procedure and resumed 31 (IQR 21-47) h later. Ninety-six percent of the patients had at least 12 h DOAC interruption before the procedure, and 78% had at least 12 h DOAC interruption after the procedure. Overall, anticoagulation was interrupted for 72 (IQR 48-96) h. Pre- or post-procedural heparin bridging was used in 8.2% and 3.9%, respectively. Timing of DOAC interruption of resumption was not associated with clinically relevant haematoma. Clinically relevant haematoma occurred in 26 patients (3.3%), and thromboembolic events occurred in 5 patients (0.6%).

CONCLUSION

In this large real-life registry where most patients had DOAC interruption, clinically relevant haematoma was rare. Despite DOAC interruption and high CHA2DS2-VASc score, thromboembolic events occurred seldomly, highlighting that bleeding exceeds thromboembolic risk in this peri-procedural period. Future research is needed to identify risk factors for clinically relevant haematoma and meaningfully guide clinicians in optimizing DOAC management.

Perioperative coagulation activation after permanent pacemaker placement

BACKGROUND

Bradyarrhythmias are typically treated with permanent pacemakers (PM). The elimination of bradyarrhythmia by PM implantation improves the patient's quality of life and prognosis, but it can also result in a number of sequalae. It is still unclear how PM implantation affects the hemostasis system's parameters and how such parameters relate to different consequences after PM placement.

AIM

To assess the blood coagulation factor activity in PM patients throughout the perioperative period.

METHODS

Patients treated in the Department of Surgical Therapy of Cardiac Arrhythmias and Pacing at the Ryazan State "Regional Clinical Cardiology Dispensary" from April 2020 to December 2021 were included in the study. Before surgery, 7 and 30 d after PM placement, peripheral venous blood samples were withdrawn to measure the level of blood coagulation factor I (FI) and the activity of blood coagulation factors II (FII), V (FV), VII (FVII), VIII (FVIII), IX (FIX), X (FX), XI (FXI), XII (FXII). We used an automatic coagulometer Sysmex CA 660 (Sysmex Europe, Germany) and reagents from Siemens (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Products GmbH, Germany).

RESULTS

The study included 146 patients. The activity of factors FV [147.7 (102.1-247.55)% vs 103.85 (60-161.6)% vs 81.8 (67.15-130.65)%, P = 0.002], FVIII [80.4 (60.15-106.25)% vs 70.3 (48.5-89.1)% vs 63.7 (41.6-88.25)%, P = 0.039], FIX [86.2 (70.75-102.95)% vs 75.4 (59.2-88.3)% vs 73.9 (56.45-93.05)%, P = 0.014], FX [188.9 (99.3-308.18)% vs 158.9 (83.3-230)% vs 127.2 (95.25-209.35)%, P = 0.022], FXI [82.6 (63.9-103.6)% vs 69.75 (53.8-97.6)% vs 67.3 (54.25-98.05)%, P = 0.002], FXII [87.6 (67.15-102.3)% vs 78.9 (63.4-97.05)% vs 81.2 (62.15-97.4)%, P < 0.001] decreased at 7 and 30 d after surgery; FII activity [157.9 (109.7-245.25)% vs 130 (86.8-192.5)% vs 144.8 (103.31-185.6)%, P = 0.021] decreased at 7 d and increased at 30 d postoperatively. There were no statistically significant changes in the FVII activity within 30 d after PM placement [182.2 (85.1-344.8)% vs 157.2 (99.1-259)% vs 108.9 (74.9-219.8)%, P = 0.128]. Subgroup analysis revealed similar changes only in patients on anticoagulant therapy. FXII activity decreased in patients on antiplatelet therapy [82 (65.8-101.9)% vs 79.9 (63.3-97.1)% vs 89.7 (75.7-102.5)%, P = 0.01] 7 d after surgery, returning to baseline values at 30 d postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

PM placement and anticoagulant therapy were associated with decreased activity of clotting factors FV, FVIII, FIX, FX, FXI, FXII in the postoperative period. FVII activity did not decrease within 30 d after PM placement, which may indicate endothelial injury caused by lead placement.

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.

Apical or Septal Right Ventricular Location in Patients Receiving Defibrillation Leads: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This study reviews the published data comparing the efficacy and safety of apical and septal right ventricle defibrillator lead positioning at 1-year follow-up. Systemic research on Medline (PubMed), ClinicalTrials.gov, and Embase was performed using the keywords "septal defibrillation," "apical defibrillation," "site defibrillation," and "defibrillation lead placement," including implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices. Comparisons between apical and septal position were performed regarding R-wave amplitude, pacing threshold at a pulse width of 0.5 ms, pacing and shock lead impedance, suboptimal lead performance, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, readmissions due to heart failure and mortality rates. A total of 5 studies comprising 1438 patients were included in the analysis. Mean age was 64.5 years, 76.9% were male, with a median LVEF of 27.8%, ischemic etiology in 51.1%, and a mean follow-up period of 26.5 months. The apical lead placement was performed in 743 patients and septal lead placement in 690 patients. Comparing the 2 placement sites, no significant differences were found regarding R-wave amplitude, lead impedance, suboptimal lead performance, LVEF, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, and mortality rate at 1-year follow-up. Pacing threshold values favored septal defibrillator lead placement (P = 0.003), as well as shock impedance (P = 0.009) and readmissions due to heart failure (P = 0.02). Among patients receiving a defibrillator lead, only pacing threshold, shock lead impedance, and readmission due to heart failure showed results favoring septal lead placement. Therefore, generally, the right ventricle lead placement does not appear to be of major importance.

5G Service and Pacemakers/Implantable Defibrillators: What Is the Actual Risk?

Rapidly growing worldwide, 5G service is expected to deeply change the way we communicate, connect and share data. It encompasses the whole spectrum of new technology, infrastructure and mobile connectivity, and will touch not only every sector in the industry, but also many aspects of our everyday life. Although the compliance with international regulations provides reasonable protection to public health and safety, there might be specific issues not fully covered by the current technical standards. Among the aspects that shall be carefully considered, there is the potential interference that can be induced on medical devices, and in particular on implantable medical devices that are critical for the patient's life, such as pacemakers and implantable defibrillators. This study aims to assess the actual risk that 5G communication systems pose to pacemakers and implantable defibrillators. The setup proposed by the ISO 14117 standard was adapted to include 5G characteristic frequencies of 700 MHz and 3.6 GHz. A total number of 384 tests were conducted. Among them, 43 EMI events were observed. Collected results reveal that RF hand-held transmitters operating in these two frequency bands do not pose additional risk compared to pre-5G bands and that the safety distance of 15 cm typically indicted by the PM/ICD manufacturer is still able to guarantee the patient's safety.

Adverse clinical events during the first 24 h of bedrest following cardiac electronic device implantation: a prospective observational study

AIMS

To describe the incidence and impact of adverse clinical events (ACEs) during first 24 h of bedrest of patients after cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a prospective observational study of patients aged over 18 years undergoing elective placement of permanent bicameral pacemaker (PM), cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) PM, CRT defibrillator, or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Patients were maintained on bedrest post-operatively for 24 h and delirium, post-operative urinary retention, severe post-operative pain, pressure ulcer, and sleep disturbance were recorded using standardized assessments. Of 90 patients, 66 (73.3%) were male and average age was 76 ± 10 years. The median time to first mobilization was 23 (21-24) h. The adverse clinical events occurred in 48/90, with severe pain (38/90), sleep disturbance (12/90), delirium (9/90), and urinary retention requiring urinary catheterization (8/90) most frequent. Patients receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillator or CRT defibrillator experienced ACEs significantly more frequently than those receiving PM. Adverse clinical event was associated with prolonged hospital stay [odds ratio (OR) 2.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16-6.17]. Patients with delirium were more dependent for daily living activities on admission (OR 8.0; 95% CI 1.55-41.3).

CONCLUSION

Adverse clinical events frequently occur post-insertion of a CIED and impact patient clinical course and experience. The progressive increase in ageing and frailty of CIED implant candidates requires special nursing attention to improve patients' satisfaction and to prevent increased healthcare resource use.

European Society of Cardiology quality indicators for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death

To develop a suite of quality indicators (QIs) for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias (VA) and the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). The Working Group comprised experts in heart rhythm management including Task Force members of the 2022 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with VA and the prevention of SCD, members of the European Heart Rhythm Association, international experts, and a patient representative. We followed the ESC methodology for QI development, which involves (i) the identification of the key domains of care for the management of patients with VA and the prevention of SCD by constructing a conceptual framework of care, (ii) the development of candidate QIs by conducting a systematic review of the literature, (iii) the selection of the final set of QIs using a modified-Delphi method, and (iv) the evaluation of the feasibility of the developed QIs. We identified eight domains of care for the management of patients with VA and the prevention of SCD: (i) structural framework, (ii) screening and diagnosis, (iii) risk stratification, (iv) patient education and lifestyle modification, (v) pharmacological treatment, (vi) device therapy, (vii) catheter ablation, and (viii) outcomes, which included 17 main and 4 secondary QIs across these domains. Following a standardized methodology, we developed 21 QIs for the management of patients with VA and the prevention of SCD. The implementation of these QIs will improve the care and outcomes of patients with VA and contribute to the prevention of SCD.

Late Incidental Discovery of Compression of the Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery by an Endocardial Defibrillator Lead

Coronary artery compression/damage by cardiac pacing/defibrillation leads is very rare and often an unknown complication of pacemaker implantation. Here, we present the case of a 71-year-old woman with late discovery of an asymptomatic compression of the left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery by a defibrillation lead implanted ten years before. This dissuaded us in removing this now malfunctioning lead with high threshold, and an additional right ventricular (RV) lead was implanted along with atrial and left ventricular (LV) leads for allowing resynchronization therapy. Based on the published data, a majority of RV leads are currently implanted in the "anteroseptal area," which is neighboring the course of the LAD.

Efficacy of the antibacterial envelope to prevent cardiac implantable electronic device infection in a high-risk population

AIMS

Infection is a serious complication of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) therapy. An antibiotic-eluting absorbable envelope has been developed to reduce the infection rate, but studies investigating the efficacy and a reasonable number needed to treat in high-risk populations for infections are limited.

METHODS AND RESULTS

One hundred and forty-four patients undergoing CIED implantation who received the antibacterial envelope were compared with a matched cohort of 382 CIED patients from our institution. The primary outcome was the occurrence of local infection, and secondary outcomes were any CIED-related local or systemic infections, including endocarditis, and all-cause mortality. The results were stratified by a risk score for CIED infection, PADIT. The envelope group had a higher PADIT score, 5.9 ± 3.1 vs. 3.9 ± 3.0 (P < 0.0001). For the primary endpoint, no local infections occurred in the envelope group, compared with 2.6% in the control group (P = 0.04), with a more pronounced difference in the stratum with a high (>7 points) PADIT score, 0 vs. 9.9% (P = 0.01). The total CIED-related infections were similar between groups, 6.3% compared with 5.0% (P = 0.567). Mortality after 1600 days of follow-up did not differ between groups, 22.9 vs. 26.4%, P = 0.475.

CONCLUSION

Our study confirms the clinical efficacy of an antibacterial envelope in the prevention of local CIED infection in patients with a higher risk according to the PADIT score. In an effort to improve cost-benefit ratios, ration of use guided by the PADIT score is advocated. Further prospective randomized studies in high-risk populations are called for.

Externalized Reusable Permanent Pacemaker for Prolonged Temporary Cardiac Pacing in Critical Cardiac Care Units: An Observational Monocentric Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

The use of temporary cardiac pacing is frequent in critical care units for severe bradycardia or electrical storm, but may be associated with frequent and potentially severe complications, especially when indwelling for several days. In some cases, transient indication or ongoing contraindication for a permanent pacemaker justifies prolonged temporary pacing. In that case, the implantation of an active-fixation lead connected to an externalized pacemaker represents a valuable option to increase safety and patient comfort. Yet, evidence remains scarce. We aimed to describe the population receiving prolonged temporary cardiac pacing (PTCP) and their outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively included all consecutive patients, admitted to our hospital from 2016 to 2021, who underwent PTCP. We collected in-hospital and six-month outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients (median age of 73, 63% male) were included, and twenty-nine (63%) had prior heart disease. Indications for PTCP were found: seventeen (37%) potentially reversible high-grade conduction disorders, fourteen (30%) indications for permanent pacemaker but ongoing infection, seven (15%) cardiac implantable electronic device infections requiring extraction in pacing-dependent patients, seven (15%) severe vagal hyperreactivity in prolonged critical care hospitalizations, and one (2%) recurrent sustained ventricular tachycardia requiring overdrive pacing. The median PTCP duration was nine (5-13) days. Ten (22%) patients exhibited at least one complication during hospitalization. Twenty-six (56.5%) patients required definite device implantation (twenty-five pacemakers and one cardioverter-defibrillator) and twenty (43.5%) did not (fifteen PTCP device removal for recovery and five deaths under PTCP). At six months, two (5%) deaths and two (5%) new infections of a definite implanted device occurred, all in patients with initial active infection.

CONCLUSION

The use of prolonged temporary cardiac pacing, with an active -fixation lead connected to an externalized pacemaker, is possible and reasonable; this would allow for the possible recovery or resolution of contraindication for definite device implantation.

Is Less Always More? A Prospective Two-Centre Study Addressing Clinical Outcomes in Leadless versus Transvenous Single-Chamber Pacemaker Recipients

(1) Background: Leadless (LL) stimulation is perceived to lower surgical, vascular, and lead-related complications compared to transvenous (TV) pacemakers, yet controlled studies are lacking and real-life experience is non-conclusive. (2) Aim: To prospectively analyse survival and complication rates in leadless versus transvenous VVIR pacemakers. (3) Methods: Prospective analysis of mortality and complications in 344 consecutive VVIR TV and LL pacemaker recipients between June 2015 and May 2021. Indications for VVIR pacing were “slow” AF, atrio-ventricular block in AF or in sinus rhythm in bedridden cognitively impaired patients. LL indication was based on individualised clinical judgement. (4) Results: 72 patients received LL and 272 TV VVIR pacemakers. LL pacemaker indications included ongoing/expected chronic haemodialysis, superior venous access issues, active lifestyle with low pacing percentage expected, frailty causing high bleeding/infectious risk, previous valvular endocarditis, or device infection requiring extraction. No significant difference in the overall acute and long-term complication rate was observed between LL and TV cohorts, with greater mortality occurring in TV due to selection of older patients. (5) Conclusions: Given the low complication rate and life expectancy in this contemporary VVIR cohort, extending LL indications to all VVIR candidates is unlikely to provide clear-cut benefits. Considering the higher costs of LL technology, careful patient selection is mandatory for LL PMs to become advantageous, i.e., in the presence of vascular access issues, high bleeding/infectious risk, and long life expectancy, rendering lead-related issues and repeated surgery relevant in the long-term perspective.

Anatomy for right ventricular lead implantation

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

Sex-Related Differences in Patient Selection for and Outcomes after Pace and Ablate for Refractory Atrial Fibrillation: Insights from a Large Multicenter Cohort

Background: A pace and ablate strategy may be performed in refractory atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response. Objective: We aimed to assess sex-related differences in patient selection and clinical outcomes after pace and ablate. Methods: In a retrospective multicentre study, patients undergoing AV junction ablation were studied. Sex-related differences in baseline characteristics, all-cause mortality, heart failure (HF) hospitalizations, and device-related complications were assessed. Results: Overall, 513 patients underwent AV junction ablation (median age 75 years, 50% men). At baseline, men were younger (72 vs. 78 years, p < 0.001), more frequently had non-paroxysmal AF (82% vs. 72%, p = 0.006), had a lower LVEF (35% vs. 55%, p < 0.001) and more frequently had cardiac resynchronization therapy (75% vs. 25%, p < 0.001). Interventional complications were rare in both groups (1.2% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.72). Patients were followed for a median of 42 months in survivors (IQR 22−62). After 4 years of follow-up, the combined endpoint of all-cause death or HF hospitalization occurred more often in men (38% vs. 27%, p = 0.008). The same was observed for HF hospitalizations (22% vs. 11%, p = 0.021) and all-cause death (28% vs. 21%, p = 0.017). Sex category remained an independent predictor of death or HF hospitalization after adjustment for age, LVEF and type of stimulation. Lead-related complications, infections, and upgrade to ICD or CRT occurred in 2.1%, 0.2% and 3.5% of patients, respectively. Conclusions: Pace and ablate is safe with a need for subsequent device-related re-interventions in 5.8% over 4 years. We found significant sex-related differences in patient selection, and women had a more favourable clinical course after AV junction ablation.

Predictors of pocket hematoma after cardiac implantable electronic device surgery: A nationwide cohort study

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Complications in Device Therapy: Spectrum, Prevalence, and Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiac implantable electronic device implant numbers are continually increasing due to the expanding indications and ageing population. This review explores the complications associated with device therapy and discusses ways to minimise and manage such complications.

RECENT FINDINGS

Complications related to device therapy contribute to mortality and morbidity. Recent publications have detailed clear guidelines for appropriate cardiac device selection, as well as consensus documents discussing care quality and optimal implantation techniques. There have also been advances in device technologies that may offer alternative options to patients at high risk of/or already having encountered a complication. Adherence to guidelines, appropriate training, and selection of device, in addition to good surgical technique are key in reducing the burden of complications and improving acceptability of device therapy.