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)

With the global increase in device implantations, there is a growing need to train physicians to implant pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Although there are international recommendations for device indications and programming, there is no consensus to date regarding implantation technique. This document is founded on a systematic literature search and review, and on consensus from an international task force. It aims to fill the gap by setting standards for device implantation.

Individualized Left Anterior Oblique Projection: A Highly Reliable Patient-Tailored Fluoroscopy Criterion for Right Ventricular Lead Positioning

BACKGROUND

Classical fluoroscopic criteria for the documentation of septal right ventricular (RV) lead positioning have poor accuracy. We sought to evaluate the individualized left anterior oblique (LAO) projection as a novel fluoroscopy criterion.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing pacemaker or defibrillator implantation were prospectively included. RV lead positioning was assessed by fluoroscopy using posteroanterior, right anterior oblique 30° to rule out coronary sinus positioning, and LAO 40° in the classical group or individualized LAO in the individualized group. Individualized LAO was defined by the degree of LAO that allowed the perfect superposition of the RV apex (using the tip of the RV lead temporarily placed at the apex) and of the superior vena cava-inferior vena cava axis (materialized by a guidewire), hence providing a true profile view of the interventricular septum. Accuracy of fluoroscopy for RV lead positioning was then assessed by comparison with true RV lead positioning using transthoracic echocardiography.

RESULTS

We included 100 patients, 50 in each study group. Agreement between RV lead septal/free wall positioning in transthoracic echocardiography and fluoroscopy was excellent in the individualized group (k=0.91), whereas it was poor in the classical group (k=0.35). Septal/free wall RV lead positioning was correctly identified in 48/50 (96%) patients in the individualized group versus 38/50 (76%) in the classical group (P=0.004). For septal lead positioning, fluoroscopy had 100% Se and 89.5% Sp in the individualized group versus 91.4% Se and 40% Sp in the classical group. Complications and procedural data were comparable in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Individualized LAO is a quick and highly reliable patient-tailored fluoroscopy projection for RV lead positioning.

Paced QRS morphology predicts incident left ventricular systolic dysfunction and atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

The prognostic significance of paced QRS complex morphology on surface ECG remains unclear. This study aimed to assess long-term outcomes associated with variations in the paced QRS complex.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent dual-chamber pacemaker implantation with 20% or more ventricular pacing and a 12-lead ECG showing a paced complex were included. The paced QRS was analyzed in leads I and aVL. Long-term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were compared at 5 years.

RESULTS

The study included 844 patients (43.1% female; age 75.0 ± 12.1). Patients with a longer paced QRS (pQRS) duration in lead I had a lower rate of atrial fibrillation (HR 0.80; p = 0.03) and higher rate of systolic dysfunction (HR 1.17; p < 0.001). Total pacing complex (TPC) duration was linked to higher rates of ICD implantation (HR 1.18; p = 0.04) and systolic dysfunction (HR 1.22, p < 0.001). Longer paced intrinsicoid deflection (pID) was associated with less atrial fibrillation (HR 0.75; p = 0.01), more systolic dysfunction (HR 1.17; p < 0.001), ICD implantation (HR 1.23; p = 0.04), and CRT upgrade (HR 1.23; p = 0.03). Exceeding thresholds for TPC, pQRS, and pID of 170, 146, and 112 ms in lead I, respectively, was associated with a substantial increase in systolic dysfunction over 5 years (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Longer durations of all tested parameters in lead I were associated with increased rates of left ventricular systolic dysfunction. ICD implantation and CRT upgrade were also linked to increased TPC and pID durations. Paradoxically, patients with longer pID and pQRS had less incident atrial fibrillation.

Classical fluoroscopy criteria poorly predict right ventricular lead septal positioning by comparison with echocardiography

BACKGROUND

Fluoroscopic criteria have been described for the documentation of septal right ventricular (RV) lead positioning, but their accuracy remains questioned.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive patients undergoing pacemaker or defibrillator implantation were prospectively included. RV lead was positioned using postero-anterior and left anterior oblique 40° incidences, and right anterior oblique 30° to rule out coronary sinus positioning when suspected. RV lead positioning using fluoroscopy was compared to true RV lead positioning as assessed by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). Precise anatomical localizations were determined with both modalities; then, RV lead positioning was ultimately dichotomized into two simple clinically relevant categories: RV septal or RV free wall. Accuracy of fluoroscopy for RV lead positioning was then assessed by comparison with TTE. We included 100 patients. On TTE, 66/100 had a septal RV lead and 34/100 had a free wall RV lead. Fluoroscopy had moderate agreement with TTE for precise anatomical localization of RV lead (k = 0.53), and poor agreement for septal/free wall localization (k = 0.36). For predicting septal RV lead positioning, classical fluoroscopy criteria had a high sensitivity (95.5%; 63/66 patients having a septal RV lead on TTE were correctly identified by fluoroscopy) but a very low specificity (35.3%; only 12/34 patients having a free wall RV lead on TTE were correctly identified by fluoroscopy).

CONCLUSION

Classical fluoroscopy criteria have a poor accuracy for identifying RV free wall leads, which are most of the time misclassified as septal. This raises important concerns about the efficacy and safety of RV lead positioning using classical fluoroscopy criteria.

Integrative and quantitive evaluation of the efficacy of his bundle related pacing in comparison with conventional right ventricular pacing: a meta-analysis

Background

Long-term RVP could bring adverse problems to cardiac electro-mechanics and result in inter- and intra-ventricular asynchrony, impaired labor force, and aggravation of cardiac function. HBRP including direct His bundle pacing and para-His bundle pacing was regarded as a novel physiological pacing pattern to avoid devastating cardiac function. This synthetic study was conducted to integratively and quantitatively evaluate the efficacy of His bundle related pacing (HBRP) in comparison with conventional right ventricular pacing (RVP).

Methods

Published studies on comparison of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end diastolic volume (LVEDV), left ventricular end systolic volume (LVESV), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, inter-ventricular asynchrony, and QRS duration, etc. between HBRP and RVP were collected and for meta-analysis.

Results

HBRP showed higher LVEF (WMD = 3.9%, 95% CI: 1.6% – 6.1%), lower NYHA class (WMD = −0.5, 95% CI: -0.7 – -0.3), WMD of LVESV = −0.1 ml, 95% CI: -3.0 – 2.8 ml), less inter-ventricular asynchrony (WMD = −13.2 ms, 95% CI: -16.4 – -10.0 ms), and shorter QRS duration for long-term (WMD = −36.9 ms, 95% CI: -40.0 – -33.8 ms), however, no significant difference of ventricular volume (WMDLVEDV = −2.4 ml, 95% CI: -5.0 – 0.2 ml; WMDLVESV = −0.1 ml, 95% CI: -3.0 – 2.8 ml) compared to RVP.

Conclusions

The efficacy of HBRP was firstly verified by meta-analysis to date. Compared with RVP, HBRP markedly preserve LVEF, NYHA class, and QRS duration. However, it seemed to have less effect on ventricular volume.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12872-017-0649-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Surface ECG and Fluoroscopy are Not Predictive of Right Ventricular Septal Lead Position Compared to Cardiac CT

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists regarding the optimal lead position for chronic right ventricular (RV) pacing. Placing a lead at the RV septum relies upon fluoroscopy assisted by a surface 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG). We compared the postimplant lead position determined by ECG-gated multidetector contrast-enhanced computed tomography (MDCT) with the position derived from the surface 12-lead ECG.

METHODS

Eighteen patients with permanent RV leads were prospectively enrolled. Leads were placed in the RV septum (RVS) in 10 and the RV apex (RVA) in eight using fluoroscopy with anteroposterior and left anterior oblique 30° views. All patients underwent MDCT imaging and paced ECG analysis. ECG criteria were: QRS duration; QRS axis; positive or negative net QRS amplitude in leads I, aVL, V1, and V6; presence of notching in the inferior leads; and transition point in precordial leads at or after V4.

RESULTS

Of the 10 leads implanted in the RVS, computed tomography (CT) imaging revealed seven to be at the anterior RV wall, two at the anteroseptal junction, and one in the true septum. For the eight RVA leads, four were anterior, two septal, and two anteroseptal. All leads implanted in the RVS met at least one ECG criteria (median 3, range 1-6). However, no criteria were specific for septal position as judged by MDCT. Mean QRS duration was 160 ± 24 ms in the RVS group compared with 168 ± 14 ms for RVA pacing (P = 0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that the surface ECG is not sufficiently accurate to determine RV septal lead tip position compared to cardiac CT.

Right Bundle Branch Block-Like Pattern During Uncomplicated Right Ventricular Pacing and the Effect of Pacing Site

Right bundle branch block (RBBB) configuration is an unexpected finding during right ventricular (RV) pacing that raises the suspicion of inadvertent left ventricular lead positioning. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of paced RBBB pattern in relation to RV lead location. This is a secondary analysis of a prospective, multicenter study, which randomized implantable cardioverter defibrillator recipients to an apical versus midseptal defibrillator lead positioning. A 12-lead electrocardiogram was recorded during intrinsic rhythm and RV pacing. Paced RBBB-like pattern was defined as positive (>0.05 mV) net amplitude of QRS complex in leads V1 and/or V2. In total, 226 patients (65.6 ± 12.0 years, 20.8% women, 53.1% apical site) were included in the study. The prevalence of paced RBBB pattern in the total population was 15.5%. A significantly lower percentage of patients in the midseptal group demonstrated RBBB-type configuration during RV pacing compared with the apical group (1.9% vs 27.5%, p <0.001). Baseline RBBB, prolonged QRS duration during intrinsic rhythm, and reduced ejection fraction were not associated with increased likelihood of paced RBBB. In the subgroup of patients with RBBB type during pacing, 91.4% of patients had a paced QRS axis from -30° to -90°, whereas 100% of patients displayed a negative QRS vector at lead V3. In conclusion, RBBB configuration is encountered in a considerable percentage of device recipients during uncomplicated RV pacing. Midseptal lead positioning is associated with significantly lower likelihood of paced RBBB pattern compared with apical location.