Validation of conventional fluoroscopic and ECG criteria for right ventricular pacemaker lead position using cardiac computed tomography

[Lead placement in cardiac implantable electronic devices]

The implantation of electrodes for cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) requires profound technical understanding and precise execution. The positioning of electrodes in the right ventricle and atrium has significant implications for patient safety and the effectiveness of CIED therapy. Particular focus is given to the distinction between apical and septal stimulation in ventricular positioning. Based on current data, this article provides a practice-oriented guide that leads implanters through the individual steps of electrode positioning. The implantation of electrodes for physiological stimulation (cardiac resynchronization therapy, CRT, and conduction system pacing, CSP) is not addressed in this article.

The application of fluoroscopic criteria to define leadless pacemakers implant position and the effect of location on device performance

OBJECTIVE

Leadless pacemakers (LPs) were designed to avoid complications associated with transvenous pacing. To minimise risk of perforations, there is preference towards implanting LPs into the septum rather than the apex or free wall.An objective yet feasible way of characterising the LP location is currently lacking. We report a simple radiological method of defining LP position and our analysis of the impact of implantation site on performance of LPs.

METHODS

The first 100 LPs implanted at our UK centre were reviewed and the devices' positions in fluoroscopy images and X-rays based on conventional criteria for lead positions and conventional practice for LPs positioning were assessed. The devices' electrical parameters at implant and at the latest device follow-up were used to compare performance between implantation sites.

RESULTS

35.6% of implants were in the apex. 31.1% in mid-septum, 16.7% in apical septum, 15.5% on the septal right ventricular inflow and 1.1% in the septal RV outflow tract. We had no major complications.Thresholds, R-wave amplitudes, and impedance averaged at 0.67 ± 0.41 V, 10.64 ± 5.30 mV, and 777.67 ± 201.67 Ohms, respectively, at the time of implantation, and 0.66 ± 0.39 V, 14.08 ± 6.14 mV, and 564.29 ± 96.76 Ohms at the last device check. There was no difference in the pacing thresholds or impedance between implant sites.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose a simple, reproducible way of defining the LP location which can help standardise the assessment of the device location sites across LP implantation centres.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

Emphasis on the safety and reliability of the leadless pacemakers in a real-world setting.Establishing the variation in the implantation sites for leadless pacemakers and reporting the effect of the implantation sites on the devices' performance.We propose a simple, reproducible way of defining the LP location which can help standardise the assessment of the device location sites across LP implantation centres.

Estimation of left ventricular activation sequence in patients with heart failure using two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography

Evaluation of longitudinal strain (LS) from two-dimensional echocardiography is useful for global and regional left ventricular (LV) dysfunction assessment. We determined whether the LS reflects contraction process in patients with asynchronous LV activation. We studied 144 patients with an ejection fraction ≤ 35%, who had left bundle branch block (LBBB, n = 42), right ventricular apical (RVA) pacing (n = 34), LV basal- or mid-lateral pacing (n = 23), and no conduction block (Narrow-QRS, n = 45). LS distribution maps were constructed using 3 standard apical views. The times from the QRS onset-to-early systolic positive peak (Q-EPpeak) and late systolic negative peak (Q-LNpeak) were measured to determine the beginning and end of contractions in each segment. Negative strain in LBBB initially appeared in the septum and basal-lateral contracted late. In RVA and LV pacing, the contracted area enlarged centrifugally from the pacing site. Narrow-QRS showed few regional differences in strain during the systolic period. The Q-EPpeak and Q-LNpeak exhibited similar sequences characterized by septum to basal-lateral via the apical regions in LBBB, apical to basal regions in RVA pacing, and lateral to a relatively large delayed contracted area between the apical- and basal-septum in LV pacing. Differences in Q-LNpeaks between the apical and basal segments in delayed contracted wall were 107 ± 30 ms in LBBB, 133 ± 46 ms in RVA pacing, and 37 ± 20 ms in LV pacing (p < 0.05, between QRS groups). Specific LV contraction processes were demonstrated by evaluating the LS distribution and time-to-peak strain. These evaluations may have potential to estimate the activation sequence in patients with asynchronous LV activation.

The Value of Left Ventricular Mechanical Dyssynchrony and Scar Burden in the Combined Assessment of Factors Associated with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Response in Patients with CRT-D

Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves the outcome in patients with heart failure (HF). However, approximately 30% of patients are nonresponsive to CRT. The aim of this study was to determine the role of the left ventricular (LV) mechanical dyssynchrony (MD) and scar burden as predictors of CRT response. Methods: In this study, we included 56 patients with HF and the left bundle-branch block with QRS duration ≥ 150 ms who underwent CRT-D implantation. In addition to a full examination, myocardial perfusion imaging and gated blood-pool single-photon emission computed tomography were performed. Patients were grouped based on the response to CRT assessed via echocardiography (decrease in LV end-systolic volume ≥15% or/and improvement in the LV ejection fraction ≥5%). Results: In total, 45 patients (80.3%) were responders and 11 (19.7%) were nonresponders to CRT. In multivariate logistic regression, LV anterior-wall standard deviation (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.5275; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1472–2.0340; p = 0.0037), summed rest score (OR 0.7299; 95% CI 0.5627–0.9469; p = 0.0178), and HF nonischemic etiology (OR 20.1425; 95% CI 1.2719–318.9961; p = 0.0331) were the independent predictors of CRT response. Conclusion: Scar burden and MD assessed using cardiac scintigraphy are associated with response to CRT.

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.

Exploratory use of intraprocedural transesophageal echocardiography to guide implantation of the leadless pacemaker

Background

Fluoroscopy is the standard tool for transvenous implantation of traditional and leadless pacemakers (LPs). LPs are used to avoid complications of conventional pacemakers, but there still is a 6.5% risk of major complications. Mid-right ventricular (RV) septal device implantation is suggested to decrease the risk, but helpful cardiac landmarks cannot be visualized under fluoroscopy. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is an alternative intraprocedural imaging method.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to explore the spatial relationship of the LP to cardiac landmarks via TEE and their correlations with electrocardiographic (ECG) parameters, and to outline an intraprocedural method to confirm mid-RV nonapical lead positioning.

Methods

Fifty-six patients undergoing implantation of LP with TEE guidance were enrolled in the study. Device position was evaluated by fluoroscopy, ECG, and TEE. Distances between the device and cardiac landmarks were measured by TEE and analyzed with ECG parameters with and without RV pacing.

Results

Mid-RV septal positioning was achieved in all patients. TEE transgastric view (0°-40°/90°-130°) was the optimal view for visualizing device position. Mean tricuspid valve-LP distance was 4.9 ± 0.9 cm, mean pulmonary valve-LP distance was 4.2 ± 1 cm, and calculated RV apex-LP distance was 2.9 ± 1 cm. Mean LP paced QRS width was 160.8 ± 28 ms and increased from 117.2 ± 34 ms at baseline. LP RV pacing resulted in left bundle branch block pattern on ECG and 37.8% QRS widening by 43.5 ± 29 ms.

Conclusion

TEE may guide LP implantation in the nonapical mid-RV position. Further studies are required to establish whether this technique reduces implant complications compared with conventional fluoroscopy.

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.

Individualised left anterior oblique projection for lead implantation into interventricular septum

Objective

We sought to investigate whether it is possible to obtain individualised left anterior oblique (LAO) by preprocedural electrocardiographic parameters and, if so, whether these parameters can help to improve the success rate of right ventricular (RV) lead implantation into the interventricular septum.

Methods

In this observational study, we assessed the relationship between preoperative electrocardiographic parameters and the angle of the interventricular septum obtained using thoracic CT. The participants were divided into two groups: a retrospective derivation cohort to derive the optimal formula for the individual septum axis, and a prospective internal validation cohort to which we applied the optimal formula and implanted using the new method.

Results

In the retrospective derivation cohort (n=39), the mean angle of individualised LAO assessed by thoracic CT was 53.1°±8.9°, and the preoperative ECG QRS axis was strongly correlated with the interventricular septum axis (R²=0.490). LAO projection derived from the preoperative ECG QRS axis confirmed that the RV lead was placed in the interventricular septum during the pacemaker procedure in the prospective internal validation group (n=30). The success rate for placing the RV lead into the interventricular septum was significantly improved in the internal validation cohort (93% vs 64%, p<0.05). In addition, the N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide level decreased significantly after surgery in the interventricular septal indwelling group.

Conclusions

Individualised LAO angle derived from the preoperative ECG QRS axis is a new useful and simple method for RV lead implantation into the interventricular septum.

Trial registration number

UMIN000045741.

Angiography-guided mid/high septal implantation of ventricular leads in patients with congenital heart disease

BACKGROUND

Conduction system pacing prevents pacing-induced cardiomyopathy, but it can be challenging to perform in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD), and mid/high septal lead implantation is an alternative. This study aimed to assess intraprocedural angiography's utility as a guide for mid/high-septal lead implantation in CHD patients.

METHODS

The study subjects were CHD patients with Class I/IIa indications for permanent pacemaker implantation. To guide septal lead implantation, we performed an intraprocedural right ventricular angiogram in anteroposterior, 40° left anterior oblique, and 30° right anterior oblique. The primary endpoint was the lead tip in the mid/high septum on computed tomography (CT). The secondary endpoints were complications and systemic ventricular function on follow-up.

RESULTS

From January 2008 to December 2018, we enrolled 27 patients (mean age: 30 ± 20 years; M:F 17:10) with CHD (unoperated: 20, operated: 7). The mean paced QRS duration was 131.7 ± 5.8 ms, and CT done in 22/27 patients confirmed the lead tip in the mid-septum in 16, high septum in 5, and apical septum in 1 patient. There were no procedural complications, and during a mean follow-up of 58 ± 35.2 months, there was no significant change in the systemic ventricular ejection fraction (56.4 ± 8.3% vs 53.9 + 5.9%, P = .08). Two patients with Eisenmenger syndrome died because of refractory heart failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraprocedural angiography is safe and useful to guide mid/high-septal lead implantation in CHD patients. Mid/high septal lead position preserves systemic ventricular function in patients with CHD during medium-term follow-up.

Computed tomography validated right ventricular mid-septal lead implantation using right ventricular angiography

BACKGROUND

Right ventricular (RV) mid-septal pacing has been proposed as an alternative to RV apical pacing. Fluoroscopic and electrocardiogram criteria are unreliable for predicting the RV mid-septal lead position. This study aimed to define the optimal RV mid-septal pacing site using RV angiography.

METHODS

We randomized patients undergoing pacemaker implantation (PPM) to the RV angiography-guided group (Group A) or conventional fluoroscopy-guided group (Group F). In Group A, we performed an angiogram in right anterior oblique (RAO 30°), left anterior oblique (LAO 40°), and left lateral (LL) views. We made a 5-segment grid in RAO 30° and LL views and a 3-segment grid in LAO 40° on the angiographic silhouette to define the lead position. Computed tomography (CT) was used to validate the lead tip position in both groups.

RESULTS

We enrolled 53 patients (Group A: 26, Group F: 27) with a mean age of 55.9 ± 12.2 years. CT images validated the lead position in the mid-septum (Group A, 23 [88.5%]; Group F, 11 [40.7%], P = .0003) and anteroseptal (Group A, 3 [11.5%]; Group F, 5 [18.5%], P = .24). In Group F, the lead was in the anterior wall in 9 patients (33.3%) and the right ventricular outflow tract in 2 (7.4%) patients and none in these two positions in Group A. The lead tip in segment one on the angiographic 5-segment grid in RAO 30° and LL views indicated a mid-septal lead position on CT.

CONCLUSIONS

RV angiography is safe and may be used to confirm the mid-septal lead position during PPM.

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.

How to get the optimal defibrillation lead parameters using myocardial perfusion scintigraphy in patients with coronary artery disease

The conventional criteria for a defibrillation lead (DL) implantation don't take into account presence of scar or deep ischemia in the myocardium. This may impair a proper functioning of the DL. We sought to optimize the DL implantation placement using rest myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS), which allow detecting areas of myocardial hypoperfusion (MH). To study the influence of MH and scarring, detected by MPS, on the DL parameters in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). 69 patients (male-65, age 64.8 ± 7.7 years) with CAD and indications for ICD implantation were enrolled. Two days before ICD implantation all patients underwent MPS at rest. Then patients were divided in 2 groups. In the 1st group DL was implanted considering MPS results: to the septal position, if the most significant MH were detected in the apical segments, and to the apical position, if MH were in the septal segments. In the 2nd group DL was implanted using the conventional approach without considering MPS results. Clinical 12 months follow-up was performed with ICD interrogation. Patients of both groups were comparable by clinical and scintigraphic parameters. In the same time, in the 1st group pacing threshold was lower (p < 0.0001) and ventricle signal amplitude was higher (p < 0.0001) comparing with the 2nd group at all control points. The presence of MH detected by MPS in the area of the DL placement worsens its parameters. The results of MPS in patients with CAD can be useful for optimization of DL placement.

Individualized left anterior oblique projection based on pigtail catheter visualization facilitates leadless pacemaker implantation

BACKGROUND

Pacemaker positioning on the right ventricular (RV) septum during implantation is conventionally conducted utilizing two fixed fluoroscopy angles, a 45° left anterior oblique (LAO) and 35° right anterior oblique projection. However, placement location can be suboptimal, especially for leadless pacemakers (LPMs).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and ease of LPM implantation using individualized LAO projection.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing LPM implantation were prospectively included. The angle of the RV septum was recorded for each patient by studying the angle at which an RV pigtail catheter (RV-PC) could be seen edge on. This was then used as the preferred LAO projection angle for that patient. We evaluated the success rate and safety of this method. We also compared the RV septum angle as measured by this method versus that measured by chest CT.

RESULTS

Of the 31 patients (mean age 80.6 ± 7.0 years, 15 females), LPM implantation was successful in 30. The pacemaker was implanted on the RV septum in 29 and on the free wall in one. LPM implantation was abandoned for anatomical reasons in one. Complications were limited to a groin arteriovenous fistula and one deep vein thrombosis. The angle of RV septum as measured by pigtail catheter and chest CT was not significantly different (CT: 54.8 ± 6.0°, RV pigtail catheter: 52.9 ± 6.1°, P = .07).

CONCLUSIONS

Using an RV-PC to determine the preferred angle of LAO projection facilitates differentiation between the RV septum and free wall, which in turn facilitates optimal LPM placement.

Comparison of delivery catheter-based and stylet-based right ventricular lead placement at the right ventricular septum under fluoroscopic guidance judged by cardiac CT (Mt. FUJI): a study protocol for the Mt. FUJI randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Pacing-induced cardiomyopathy occasionally occurs in patients undergoing pacemaker implantation. Although compared with right ventricular (RV) apical pacing, RV septal pacing can attenuate left ventricular dyssynchrony; the success rate of lead placement on the RV septum using the stylet system is low. Additionally, no randomised controlled trial has addressed the issue regarding the accuracy of RV lead placement on the RV septum using the stylet and delivery catheter systems. This study hypothesises that a newly available delivery catheter system can improve the accuracy of RV lead placement on the RV septum.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In a multicentre, prospective, randomised, single-blind, controlled trial, 70 patients with pacemaker indication owing to atrioventricular block will be randomised to either the delivery catheter or stylet group before the pacemaker implantation procedure. The position of the RV lead tip will be assessed using ECG-gated cardiac CT in all patients within 4 weeks after pacemaker implantation. Lead tip positions are classified into three groups: (1) RV septum, (2) anterior/posterior edge of the RV septal wall and (3) RV free wall. The primary endpoint will be the success rate of RV lead tip placement on the RV septum, which will be evaluated using cardiac CT.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will be conducted according to the stipulations of the Helsinki Declaration and the institutional review board of Hamamatsu University School of Medicine. The results of the study will be disseminated at several research conferences and will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

jRCTs042200014; Pre-results.

Multipoint Pacing with Fusion-optimized Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: Using It All to Narrow QRS Duration

Adaptive atrioventricular (AV)-shortening algorithms have achieved QRS duration (QRSd) narrowing in traditional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) patients. Multipoint pacing (MPP) has also demonstrated benefit in this population. An additional site of activation via intrinsic conduction of the septum may further contribute to CRT; however, the incorporation of all strategies together has yet to be explored. We therefore developed and tested a method combining MPP-CRT and controlled septal contribution to create a multifuse pacing (MFP) technique, establishing four ventricular activation sites for CRT patients using measurements from intracardiac electrograms (EGMs) and incorporating an AV-delay shortening algorithm (SyncAV™; Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL, USA) to narrow the QRSd. Patients in sinus rhythm with an AV conduction time of less than 350 ms were included in this analysis and were further stratified by strictly defined left bundle branch block (sLBBB) or nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay (IVCD). EGM-based measurements to determine the QRS septal onset to right ventricular (RV) time (SRAT) and the left ventricular (LV) to RV pacing conduction time were collected and applied to a formula to facilitate MFP. QRSd was compared between before and after programming. A total of 22 patients (19 men and three women) with similar baseline characteristics were compared (all values in mean ± standard deviation). The overall baseline QRSd of 153.31 ± 24.60 ms was decreased to 115.31 ± 16.31 ms after MFP programming (p < 0.0001). The measured SRAT was 59.40 ± 28.49 ms, resulting in a negative AV offset of −20.0 ± 24.97 ms. Patients in the sLBBB group (n = 7) were aged 67.8 ± 13.3 years and had a QRSd of 168.85 ± 27.29 ms that decreased to 113 ± 16.69 ms for a reduction of 55.42 ± 19.3 ms or 32.1% (p = 0.0003). In the IVCD group (n = 15), the baseline QRSd of 146.06 ± 20.29 ms was decreased to 116 ± 16.66 ms for a reduction of 30.07 ± 16.41 ms or 20.62% (p = 0.0001). When comparing the sLBBB and IVCD groups, the sLBBB group was favored by a reduction of 25.35 ms (p = 0.00046). Ultimately, MFP achieved statistically significant reductions in QRSd in all patients tested in this analysis. The benefit was also significantly better in the sLBBB group as compared with in the IVCD group.

The usefulness of a delivery catheter system for right ventricular "true" septal pacing

Right ventricular (RV) septum is an alternate site for the placement of RV lead tip instead of RV apex. Recent studies have demonstrated that less than half of the RV leads targeted for septal implantation are placed on the RV septum using a conventional stylet system; new guiding catheter systems have become available for RV lead placement. This study aimed to investigate the usefulness of the delivery catheter system in lead placement on the RV septum when compared with the stylet system. We retrospectively evaluated 198 patients who underwent fluoroscopically guided pacemaker implantation with RV leads targeted to be placed in the RV septum and in whom computed tomography was incidentally and subsequently performed. A delivery catheter was used in 16 patients, and a stylet in 182 patients. The primary endpoint of this study was the success rate of RV lead placement on the RV septum. The proportion of RV lead placement on the RV septum was higher in the delivery catheter group than in the stylet group (100% vs. 44%; p < 0.001). In the stylet group, the lead tips were placed at the hinge in 92 cases (51%) and on the free wall in 9 cases (5%). Paced QRS duration was narrower in the delivery catheter group than in the stylet group (128 ± 16 vs. 150 ± 21 ms, p < 0.01). The delivery catheter system designated for pacing leads may aid in selecting RV septal sites and achieve good physiologic ventricular activation.

Single-chamber leadless pacemaker for atrial synchronous or ventricular pacing

Leadless pacing is a major breakthrough in the management of bradyarrhythmia. Results of initial clinical trials that have demonstrated a significant reduction in acute and long-term pacing-related complications have been confirmed by real-world experience in a broader spectrum of patients. Nonetheless current use of a leadless pacemaker is hampered by its limited atrial sensing and pacing capability, as well as battery life-span and retrievability. We review the current clinical outcome data, indications and contraindications, implantation and retrieval techniques, synchronous ventricular pacing, and other clinical considerations. We also provide an overview of the latest advancements in leadless pacing technology including device-to-device communication and energy harvesting technology.

Can QRS morphology be used to differentiate between true septal vs. apparently septal lead placement? An analysis of ECG of real mid-septal, apparent mid-septal, and apical pacing

The location of the pacemaker lead is based on the shape of the lead on fluoroscopy only, typically in the left and right anterior oblique positions. However, these fluoroscopy criteria are insufficient and many leads apparently considered to be in septum are in fact anchored in anterior wall. Periprocedural ECG could determine the correct lead location. The aim of the current analysis is to characterize ECG criteria associated with a correct position of the right ventricular (RV) lead in the mid-septum. Patients with indications for a pacemaker had the RV lead implanted in the apex (Group A) or mid-septum using the standard fluoroscopic criteria. The exact position of the RV lead was verified using computed tomography. Based on the findings, the mid-septal group was divided into two subgroups: (i) true septum, i.e. lead was found in the mid-septum, and (ii) false septum, i.e. lead was in the adjacent areas (anterior wall, anteroseptal groove). Paced ECGs were acquired from all patients and multiple criteria were analysed. Paced ECGs from 106 patients were analysed (27 in A, 36 in true septum, and 43 in false septum group). Group A had a significantly wider QRS, more left-deviated axis and later transition zone compared with the true septum and false septum groups. There were no differences in presence of q in lead I, or notching in inferior or lateral leads between the three groups. QRS patterns of true septum and false septum groups were similar with only one exception of the transition zone. In the multivariate model, the only ECG parameters associated with correct lead placement in the septum was an earlier transition zone (odds ratio (OR) 2.53, P = 0.001). ECGs can be easily used to differentiate apical pacing from septal or septum-close pacing. The only ECG characteristic that could help to identify true septum lead position was the transition zone in the precordial leads. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02412176.

Peak deflection index as a predictor of a free-wall implantation of contemporary leadless pacemakers

BACKGROUND

Leadless pacemakers are an effective treatment for bradycardia. However, some cases exhibit pericardial effusions, presumably associated with device implantations on the right ventricular free-wall. The present study was carried out to find the ECG features during ventricular pacing with a Micra, which enabled distinguishing free-wall implantations from septal implantations without using imaging modalities.

METHODS

Thirty-one consecutive patients who received Micra implantations in our facility were enrolled. The location of the device in the right ventricle was evaluated using echocardiography or computed tomography in order to determine whether the device was implanted on the septum (Sep group), apex (Apex group), or free-wall (FW group). The differences in the 12-lead ECG during ventricular pacing by the Micra were analyzed between the Sep and FW groups.

RESULTS

The body of the Micra was clearly identifiable in 22 patients. The location of the device was classified into Sep in 12 patients, Apex in 4, and FW in 6. The mean age was highest in the FW and lowest in the Sep group (82.7 ± 6.6 vs. 72.8 ± 8.7 years, p = 0.027). The peak deflection index (PDI) was significantly larger in the FW group than Sep/Apex group in lead V1 (Sep: 0.505 ± 0.010, Apex: 0.402 ± 0.052, FW: 0.617 ± 0.043, p = 0.004) and lead V2 (Sep: 0.450 ± 0.066, Apex: 0.409 ± 0.037, FW: 0.521 ± 0.030, p = 0.011), whereas there was no difference in the QRS duration, transitional zone, and QRS notching.

CONCLUSION

The PDI in V1 could be useful for predicting implantations of Micra devices on the free-wall and may potentially stratify the risk of postprocedural pericardial effusions.

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.

Inappropriate shock and percutaneous cardiac intervention: A lesson to learn in the cath lab

Coronary disease is a common condition in patients affected by heart failure with severely reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This condition represents an indication for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in order to reduce the risk of sudden death related to arrhythmias. Nevertheless, inappropriate shocks are associated with worse quality of life, hospitalization, and death. We present the case of an inappropriate shock related to percutaneous coronary intervention during the insertion and advancement of the guidewire into the left anterior descending artery (LAD) in a patient with an ICD. Physicians' awareness about the clinical implication of noise arising during a coronary procedure is very important in patients with an ICD or pacemaker, to avoid inappropriate shock or pacing inhibition and to raise the possibility of lead implantation in or helix protrusion into the coronary lumen.

The usefulness of right ventriculography to aid anchoring a pacing lead to the right ventricular septum

Aims

Although right ventricular septal pacing is thought to be more effective in minimizing pacing-induced left ventricular dysfunction, the accurate way to anchor the lead to the right ventricular septum (RVS) has not been established. Our aim was to clarify the usefulness of right ventriculography (RVG) to aid accurate anchoring of the lead to the RVS.

Methods and results

Eighty-four patients who underwent pacemaker implantation were enrolled. We anchored the lead to the RVS by using an RVG image obtained at a 30° right anterior oblique view as a reference. We confirmed the actual lead position by performing computed tomography after the procedure and examined the characteristics of the paced QRS complex. Of the 81 patients, except 3 patients whose leads were anchored to the apex due to high pacing thresholds in the RVS, the leads were successfully anchored to the RVS in the 79 (98%) patients, and the number of leads placed in the high-, mid-, and low-RVS was 3 (4%), 58 (73%), and 18 (23%), respectively. The paced QRS duration in these 79 patients was 140 ± 13 ms. The paced QRS duration from mid-RVS was considerably narrower than that from high- or low-RVS (137 ± 12 ms vs. 146 ± 12 ms; P = 0.012).

Conclusion

Right ventriculography was very useful in aiding accurate anchoring of the lead to the RVS. Further, pacing from mid-RVS may be more effective in minimizing the QRS duration than pacing from other RVS sites.

Lead Extraction Imaging

Lead extraction procedures have a low but real risk of major complications, such as superior vena cava tear and cardiac tamponade. Complications during lead removal are commonly related to lead binding sites, lead malposition, and lead perforation. Lead extraction imaging may indicate lead vascular binding sites, lead position, and perforation. Several imaging modalities are available, including chest radiograph, cardiac computed tomography, and echocardiography. The information provided by various imaging modalities will help assess the challenges of each lead extraction procedure and allows for better preprocedure planning.

Clinical Influence and Predictors of Pacing-Induced Mechanical Asynchrony in Patients with Normal Cardiac Function with Ventricular Lead Placed in Non-Apical Position

Right ventricular apical (RVA) pacing often causes left ventricular (LV) mechanical asynchrony, which is enhanced by impaired cardiac contraction and intrinsic conduction abnormality. However, data on patients with normal cardiac function and under RV non-apical (non-RVA) pacing are limited.We retrospectively investigated 97 consecutive patients with normal ejection fraction who received pacemaker implantation for atrioventricular block with the ventricular lead placed in a non-RVA position. We defined mechanical asynchrony as discoordinate contraction between opposing regions of the LV wall evaluated by echocardiography. Asynchrony was detected in 9 (9%) patients at baseline and in 38 (39%) under non-RVA pacing (P < 0.001). Asynchrony at baseline was significantly associated with complete left bundle branch block (CLBBB) [odds ratio (OR) = 20.8, P < 0.001]. Asynchrony under non-RVA pacing was significantly associated with left anterior fascicular block (LAFB) (OR = 7.14, P < 0.001) and CLBBB (OR = 13.3, P = 0.002) at baseline. New occurrence of asynchrony was significantly associated with LAFB at baseline (OR = 5.88, P = 0.001). During a median follow-up period of 4.8 years, the incidence of device-detected atrial fibrillation (AF) was more frequent in patients who developed asynchrony than in those who did not (53.3% versus 27.5%, hazard ratio = 2.17, 95% confidence interval = 1.02-4.61, P = 0.03).In patients with normal cardiac function, LAFB at baseline was significantly associated with new occurrence of mechanical asynchrony under non-RVA pacing. Abnormal contraction had a significant influence on the incidence of device-detected AF.

Ventricular septal pacing: Optimum method to position the lead

Adverse hemodynamics of right ventricular (RV) pacing is known for years. Several studies have revealed that adverse outcomes of RV apical pacing are directly linked to cumulative percentage of ventricular pacing. Algorithms to minimize ventricular pacing are only effective if there is good atrioventricular (AV) conduction. A need for an alternate site for ventricular pacing is evident in patients with high presumed ventricular pacing burden. Most studied alternate site for ventricular pacing is ventricular septum (outflow tract septum and mid-septum). Conventionally septal position of the ventricular pacing lead is confirmed by fluoroscopic appearance of the lead and characteristics electrocardiographic (ECG) features. However, several recent studies have challenged these fluoroscopic and ECG features as to be inadequate. So, there is need for a systematic approach for septal positioning of the ventricular lead.

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.

Impact of simple electrocardiographic markers as predictors for deterioration of left ventricular function in patients with frequent right ventricular apical pacing

Several trials demonstrated that frequent right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP) was associated with cardiac dysfunction and an increased rate of heart failure hospitalization. However, there are few reports about the 12-lead electrocardiogram (12-ECG) parameters at the time of device implantation to predict deterioration of LVEF in patients with frequent RVAP. We retrospectively studied 115 consecutive patients undergoing pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation with RVAP, with rate of ventricular pacing ≥ 40% and LVEF ≥ 50% at the time of implantation. We compared the 12-ECG characteristics at the time of device implantation between patients with deterioration of LVEF (≥ 10% reduction) and those without. Twenty-nine patients (25%) had deteriorated LVEF with a decrease in mean LVEF from 59 to 40% during a median follow-up period of 8.9 [4.6-13.7] years. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that cumulative % of ventricular pacing [odds ratio (OR) 1.04 per 1% increase, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.09, p = 0.04], notching of baseline paced QRS in limb leads (OR 5.04, 95% CI 1.59-19.6, p = 0.005) and the QS pattern in all precordial leads (OR 3.56, 95% CI 1.21-10.8, p = 0.02) were independently associated with deterioration of LVEF. The QS pattern of baseline paced QRS in all precordial leads had 58% sensitivity, 93% specificity for the RV lead position at the tip of RV apex. In conclusion, considering OR by multivariate analysis, notching of baseline paced QRS in limb leads and the QS pattern in all precordial leads at device implantation may be simple and useful predictors to identify patients who are at risk for deterioration of cardiac function during long-term RVAP. 12-ECG monitoring at device implantation and avoidance of the RVAP site showing a QS pattern may be important to prevent deterioration of cardiac function in patients with frequent RVAP.

Beware of the coronary arteries with implantable cardiac electronic devices

The transvenous implantation of cardiac devices may sometimes cause serious complications involving the coronary arteries. The left anterior descending artery may be injured during nonapical right ventricular implantation while a right atrial lead may injure the right or circumflex coronary artery. Injury of a left internal mammary graft to a coronary artery may cause myocardial infarction.

Using the Surface ECG to Identify Right Ventricular Pacing Lead Position: A Cautionary Tale

Chronic right ventricular (RV) apical pacing may lead to the development of heart failure in some patients. Although pacing of the RV septum has been proposed as an alternative, positioning a lead in the true septum has proven challenging. In addition to fluoroscopy at implant, it has been suggested that 12-lead surface electrocardiogram (ECG) can be used to determine septal lead position; however, studies show this may be inaccurate. We present a case where a change in the ECG QRS axis late after pacemaker insertion with an active fixation lead highlights the difficulties of ECG localization of pacing leads.

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.

Imaging and Right Ventricular Pacing Lead Position: A Comparison of CT, MRI, and Echocardiography

BACKGROUND

Right ventricular nonapical (RVNA) pacing may reduce the risk of heart failure. Fluoroscopy is the standard approach to determine lead tip position, but is inaccurate. We compared cardiac computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), two-dimensional and three-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), and chest x-ray (CXR) to assess which provides the optimal assessment of right ventricular (RV) lead tip position.

METHODS

Eighteen patients with MRI-conditional pacemakers (10 RVNA and eight apical [RVA] leads) underwent contrast CT, MRI, TTE, and a standard postimplant posteroanterior and lateral CXR. To compare images, the RV was arbitrarily partitioned into three long-axis segments (right ventricular outflow tract, middle, and apex), and two short-axis segments (septal and nonseptal). Agreement between modalities was assessed.

RESULTS

RV lead tip position was identified in all patients on CT, TTE, and CXR, but was not identified in seven (39%) patients on MRI due to device-related artifact. Of 10 leads deemed to be nonapical/septal during implant, 70% were identified as nonapical on CXR, 60% on CT, 60% on MRI, and 80% on TTE. On CT imaging only 10% were truly septal, 20% on MRI, 30% on CXR, and 80% on TTE. Agreement was better between modalities when assessing position of the designated RVA leads.

CONCLUSION

During implant leads intended for the septum are not confirmed as such on subsequent imaging, and marked heterogeneity is apparent between modalities. MRI is limited by artifact, and discrepancy exists between TTE and CT in identifying septal lead position. CT gave the clearest definition of lead tip position.

A randomized comparison of fluoroscopic techniques for implanting pacemaker lead on the right ventricular outflow tract septum

Right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) septal pacing is commonly performed under the standard fluoroscopic positions during procedure. The aim of the prospective, randomized study was to evaluate the accuracy of the combination of standard fluoroscopic and left lateral (LL) fluoroscopic views for determination of RVOT septal position compared with standard fluoroscopic views alone. We prospectively enrolled patients who had indications for implantation of a permanent pacemaker. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups based on intraoperative fluoroscopic views as follows: LL group (three standard fluoroscopic views + LL fluoroscopic view) or standard group (three standard fluoroscopic views). Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) determination of pacing sites was applied in all patients 3 days after pacemaker implantation. The implantation success rate of RVOT septal pacing was compared between groups. A total of 143 patients (59 males, mean age 57.6 ± 16.3 years) with symptomatic bradyarrhythmia were studied, of whom, 72 patients were randomized to LL group and 71 to standard group. TTE determination of pacing sites was compared with two groups. In the LL group, 60 patients (83 %) were achieved in RVOT septal position. In the standard group, however, the position of RVOT septum was only observed in 48 patients (68 %). The success rate of RVOT septal position in LL group was significantly higher than standard group (p = 0.029). Comparing to traditional views, combining LL view in the procedure will approve the accuracy of RVOT septal pacing site.

Inadequacy of fluoroscopy and electrocardiogram in predicting septal position in RVOT pacing - Validation with cardiac computed tomography

BACKGROUND

Electrocardiographic (ECG) and fluoroscopic criteria, which are the only available guides to achieve a true septal position during right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) pacing, have been infrequently validated. We sought to validate these using cardiac computed tomographic angiography (CTA) to confirm lead position within the RVOT septum.

METHODS

Forty-four patients with permanent pacemaker leads in the RVOT position underwent CTA. Lead positions in RVOT were classified as anterior, free wall, or septal location. Fluoroscopic images were obtained in 4 standard views.

RESULTS

Only 19 (43%) patients had lead in true septal position within the RVOT in CTA while 25 patients (57%) were found to have an anterior lead location. Mean QRS axis, QRS duration, negative QRS in lead I, and notching in inferior leads were not significantly different between the two groups. The standard fluoroscopic LAO view showed a rightward-directed lead not only in all 19 patients with septal location, but also in 14/25 patients in the anterior location (p=0.22), and thus had a sensitivity of 100% but specificity of only 16% in predicting true septal position. The posteriorly directed lead in left lateral view was more accurate in predicting true septal position with good sensitivity (73.7%) and excellent specificity (80%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study, using validation with CTA, showed that conventional ECG criteria and fluoroscopy are inaccurate in differentiating septal from anterior RVOT pacing. The fluoroscopic lateral view, as corroborated by CTA, is more reliable than the LAO view in predicting septal lead placement.

Pacing site in pacemaker dependency: is right ventricular septal lead position the answer?

The right ventricular apex has been the traditional site for lead placement in patients with atrioventricular block. Pacing at the right ventricular apex may have long-term deleterious effects on left ventricular (LV) function, promoting heart failure and increasing mortality. Pacing at the right ventricular septum has been proposed to minimize deterioration in LV function. Although experimental data suggest that septal pacing protects LV function, clinical studies have provided conflicting results. A recent large study in patients with heart block did not show a protective effect with septal pacing. Other pacing approaches are becoming increasingly relevant; however, prediction of what method should be employed in which patient is not currently possible. Other factors such as baseline LV function and associated co-morbidities impact LV function, irrespective of pacing site. Continued monitoring of cardiac function post-implant is therefore critical to ongoing care. An algorithm for managing patients with atrioventricular block is proposed.

Incidence, management, and prevention of right ventricular perforation by pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads

BACKGROUND

Cardiac perforation of the right ventricle (RV) is a rare but potentially life-threatening complication of both pacemaker (PM) and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implant. Appropriate management is still uncertain. We assessed the incidence of subacute (24 hours-1 month) or delayed (>1 month) cardiac perforation by RV lead and the results of percutaneous lead extraction.

METHOD

The study population included all patients diagnosed with subacute or delayed RV-lead perforation during the period 2007-2013. The incidence of perforation according to device type and fixation mechanism was calculated. The outcome of the percutaneous approach, consisting of lead extraction by simple traction, was assessed.

RESULTS

Cardiac perforation was diagnosed in 14 (eight females, mean age 71 [range 47-83] years) patients out of 3,815 who received an RV-lead implant (0.4%). The overall incidence of RV-lead perforation was similar between ICD (0.3%) and PM (0.4%) implants (P = 1.0) and between active (0.5%) and passive (0.3%) fixation leads (P = 0.3). All perforating leads were originally placed at the RV apex. Five patients were asymptomatic, but all presented altered lead electrical parameters. Surgical removal of the lead was performed in one patient while in the remaining the leads were successfully extracted by direct manual traction in the absence of any complications. In all patients, new active fixation leads were positioned in the RV septum and the follow-up (42 ± 27 months) was uneventful.

CONCLUSIONS

RV perforation is a rare complication of both PM and ICD implants, regardless of the lead fixation mechanism. In most patients, percutaneous lead extraction is a safe and effective management approach.