Tracking the motion of intracardiac structures aids the development of future leadless pacing systems

Optimizing electrical efficacy of leadless cardiac resynchronization therapy and leadless left ventricular septal pacing: Insights on left and right ventricular activation from electrocardiographic imaging

Background

Leadless cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an emerging heart failure treatment. An implanted electrode delivers lateral or septal endocardial left ventricular (LV) pacing (LVP) upon detection of a right ventricular (RV) pacing stimulus from a coimplanted device, thus generating biventricular pacing (BiVP). Electrical efficacy data regarding this therapy, particularly leadless LV septal pacing (LVSP) for potential conduction system capture, are limited.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the acute performance of leadless CRT using electrocardiographic imaging (ECGi) and assess the optimal pacing modality (OPM) of LVSP on the basis of RV and LV activation.

Methods

Ten WiSE-CRT recipients underwent an ECGi study testing: RV pacing, BiVP, LVP only, and LVP with an optimized atrioventricular delay (LV-OPT). BiV, LV, and RV activation times (shortest time taken to activate 90% of the ventricles [BIVAT-90], shortest time taken to activate 95% of the LV, and shortest time taken to activate 90% of the RV) plus LV and BiV dyssynchrony index (standard deviation of LV activation times and standard deviation of all activation times) were calculated from reconstructed epicardial electrograms. The individual OPM yielding the greatest improvement from baseline was determined.

Results

BiVP generated a 23.7% improvement in BiVAT-90 (P = .002). An improvement of 43.3% was observed at the OPM (P = .0001), primarily through reductions in shortest time taken to activate 90% of the RV. At the OPM, BiVAT-90 improved in patients with lateral (43.3%; P = .0001; n = 5) and septal (42.4%; P = .009; n = 5) LV implants. The OPM varied by individual. LVP and LV-OPT were mostly superior in patients with LVSP, and in those with sinus rhythm and left bundle branch block (n = 4).

Conclusion

Leadless CRT significantly improves acute ECGi-derived activation and dyssynchrony metrics. Using an individualized OPM improves efficacy in selected patients. Effective LVSP is feasible, with fusion pacing at LV-OPT mitigating the potential deleterious effects on RV activation.

Anatomic, histologic, and mechanical features of the right atrium: implications for leadless atrial pacemaker implantation

BACKGROUND

Leadless pacemakers (LPs) may mitigate the risk of lead failure and pocket infection related to conventional transvenous pacemakers. Atrial LPs are currently being investigated. However, the optimal and safest implant site is not known.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the right atrial (RA) anatomy and the adjacent structures using complementary analytic models [gross anatomy, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and computer simulation], to identify the optimal safest location to implant an atrial LP human.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Wall thickness and anatomic relationships of the RA were studied in 45 formalin-preserved human hearts. In vivo RA anatomy was assessed in 100 cardiac MRI scans. Finally, 3D collision modelling was undertaken assessing for mechanical device interaction. Three potential locations for an atrial LP were identified; the right atrial appendage (RAA) base, apex, and RA lateral wall. The RAA base had a wall thickness of 2.7 ± 1.6 mm, with a low incidence of collision in virtual implants. The anteromedial recess of the RAA apex had a wall thickness of only 1.3 ± 0.4 mm and minimal interaction in the collision modelling. The RA lateral wall thickness was 2.6 ± 0.9 mm but is in close proximity to the phrenic nerve and sinoatrial artery.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on anatomical review and 3D modelling, the best compromise for an atrial LP implantation may be the RAA base (low incidence of collision, relatively thick myocardial tissue, and without proximity to relevant epicardial structures); the anteromedial recess of the RAA apex and lateral wall are alternate sites. The mid-RAA, RA/superior vena cava junction, and septum appear to be sub-optimal fixation locations.

Leadless Pacing: Therapy, Challenges and Novelties

Leadless pacing is a rapidly growing field. Initially designed to provide right ventricular pacing for those who were contraindicated for conventional devices, the technology is growing to explore the potential benefit of avoiding long-term transvenous leads in any patient who requires pacing. In this review, we first examine the safety and performance of leadless pacing devices. We then review the evidence for their use in special populations, such as patients with high risk of device infection, patients on haemodialysis, and patients with vasovagal syncope who represent a younger population who may wish to avoid transvenous pacing. We also summarise the evidence for leadless cardiac resynchronisation therapy and conduction system pacing and discuss the challenges of managing issues, such as system revisions, end of battery life and extractions. Finally, we discuss future directions in the field, such as completely leadless cardiac resynchronisation therapy-defibrillator devices and whether leadless pacing has the potential to become a first-line therapy in the near future.

Leadless Cardiac Pacing: New Horizons

Since the introduction of transvenous cardiac pacing leads, pacemaker system design has remained similar for several decades. Progressive miniaturisation of electronic circuitry and batteries has enabled a smaller, single pacing unit comprising the intracardiac electrodes, generator and computer. This review explores the development of leadless pacing, the clinical trials comparing leadless to transvenous pacing in addition to the future developments of multi-chamber leadless pacing.

Global Sensitivity Analysis of Four Chamber Heart Hemodynamics Using Surrogate Models

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is used to assist in designing artificial valves and planning procedures, focusing on local flow features. However, assessing the impact on overall cardiovascular function or predicting longer-term outcomes may requires more comprehensive whole heart CFD models. Fitting such models to patient data requires numerous computationally expensive simulations, and depends on specific clinical measurements to constrain model parameters, hampering clinical adoption. Surrogate models can help to accelerate the fitting process while accounting for the added uncertainty. We create a validated patient-specific four-chamber heart CFD model based on the Navier-Stokes-Brinkman (NSB) equations and test Gaussian Process Emulators (GPEs) as a surrogate model for performing a variance-based global sensitivity analysis (GSA). GSA identified preload as the dominant driver of flow in both the right and left side of the heart, respectively. Left-right differences were seen in terms of vascular outflow resistances, with pulmonary artery resistance having a much larger impact on flow than aortic resistance. Our results suggest that GPEs can be used to identify parameters in personalized whole heart CFD models, and highlight the importance of accurate preload measurements.

Evolution of tricuspid valve regurgitation after implantation of a leadless pacemaker - a single center experience, systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Conventional transvenous pacemaker leads may interfere with the tricuspid valve leaflets, tendinous chords, and papillary muscles, resulting in significant tricuspid valve regurgitation (TR). Leadless pacemakers (LLPMs) theoretically cause less mechanical interference with the tricuspid valve apparatus. However, data on TR after LLPM implantation are sparse and conflicting. Our goal was to investigate the prevalence of significant TR before and after LLPM implantation.

Methods

Patients who received a leadless LLPM (Micra™ TPS, Medtronic) between May 2016 and May 2021 at our center were included in this observational study if they had at least a pre‐ and postinterventional echocardiogram (TTE). The evolution of TR severity was assessed. Following a systematic literature review on TR evolution after implantation of a LLPM, data were pooled in a random‐effects meta‐analysis.

Results

We included 69 patients (median age 78 years [interquartile range (IQR) 72–84 years], 26% women). Follow‐up duration between baseline and follow‐up TTE was 11.4 months (IQR 3.5–20.1 months). At follow‐up, overall TR severity was not different compared to baseline (p = .49). Six patients (9%) had new significant TR during follow‐up after LLPM implantation, whereas TR severity improved in seven patients (10%). In the systematic review, we identified seven additional articles that investigated the prevalence of significant TR after LLPM implantation. The meta‐analysis based on 297 patients failed to show a difference in significant TR before and after LLPM implantation (risk ratio 1.22, 95% confidence interval 0.97–1.53, p = .11).

Conclusion

To date, there is no substantial evidence for a significant change in TR after implantation of a LLPM.

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

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