His-Purkinje Conduction System Pacing: State of the Art in 2020

Computational Modelling Enabling In Silico Trials for Cardiac Physiologic Pacing

Conduction system pacing (CSP) has the potential to achieve physiological-paced activation by pacing the ventricular conduction system. Before CSP is adopted in standard clinical practice, large, randomised, and multi-centre trials are required to investigate CSP safety and efficacy compared to standard biventricular pacing (BVP). Furthermore, there are unanswered questions about pacing thresholds required to achieve optimal pacing delivery while preventing device battery draining, and about which patient groups are more likely to benefit from CSP rather than BVP. In silico studies have been increasingly used to investigate mechanisms underlying changes in cardiac function in response to pathologies and treatment. In the context of CSP, they have been used to improve our understanding of conduction system capture to optimise CSP delivery and battery life, and noninvasively compare different pacing methods on different patient groups. In this review, we discuss the in silico studies published to date investigating different aspects of CSP delivery.

New Guidelines of Pediatric Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: What Is Changing in Clinical Practice?

Guidelines are important tools to guide the diagnosis and treatment of patients to improve the decision-making process of health professionals. They are periodically updated according to new evidence. Four new Guidelines in 2021, 2022 and 2023 referred to pediatric pacing and defibrillation. There are some relevant changes in permanent pacing. In patients with atrioventricular block, the heart rate limit in which pacemaker implantation is recommended was decreased to reduce too-early device implantation. However, it was underlined that the heart rate criterion is not absolute, as signs or symptoms of hemodynamically not tolerated bradycardia may even occur at higher rates. In sinus node dysfunction, symptomatic bradycardia is the most relevant recommendation for pacing. Physiological pacing is increasingly used and recommended when the amount of ventricular pacing is presumed to be high. New recommendations suggest that loop recorders may guide the management of inherited arrhythmia syndromes and may be useful for severe but not frequent palpitations. Regarding defibrillator implantation, the main changes are in primary prevention recommendations. In hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, pediatric risk calculators have been included in the Guidelines. In dilated cardiomyopathy, due to the rarity of sudden cardiac death in pediatric age, low ejection fraction criteria were demoted to class II. In long QT syndrome, new criteria included severely prolonged QTc with different limits according to genotype, and some specific mutations. In arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy, hemodynamically tolerated ventricular tachycardia and arrhythmic syncope were downgraded to class II recommendation. In conclusion, these new Guidelines aim to assess all aspects of cardiac implantable electronic devices and improve treatment strategies.

Conduction system pacing: how far are we from the "electrical" bypass?

Conduction system pacing is an alternative practice to conventional right ventricular apical pacing. It is a method that maintains physiologic ventricular activation, based on a correct pathophysiological basis, in which the pacing lead bypasses the lesion of the electrical fibers and the electrical impulse transmits through the intact adjacent conduction system. For this reason, it might be reasonably characterized by the term "electrical bypass" compared to the coronary artery bypass in revascularization therapy. In this review, reference is made to the sequence of events in which conventional right ventricular pacing may cause adverse outcomes. Furthermore, there is a reference to alternative strategies and pacing sites. Interest focuses on the modalities for which there are data from the literature, namely for the right ventricular (RV) septal pacing, the His bundle pacing (HBP), and the left bundle branch pacing (LBBP). A more extensive reference is about the HBP, for which there are the most updated data. We analyze the considerations that limit HBP-wide application in three axes, and we also present the data for the implantation and follow-up of these patients. The indications with their most important studies to date are then described in detail, not only in their undoubtedly positive findings but also in their weak aspects, because of which this pacing mode has not yet received a strong recommendation for implementation. Finally, there is a report on LBBP, focusing mainly on its points of differentiation from HBP.

Speckle tracking imaging evaluation of left ventricular myocardial work comparing right ventricular septal pacing with His-Purkinje system area pacing

Aims

We sought to objectively assess left ventricular myocardial work (MW) parameters after right ventricular septal pacing (VSP) and His-Purkinje system area pacing (HPSAP) procedures.

Materials and methods

Patients undergoing double-chamber pacemaker implantation for III-degree atrioventricular block (III° AVB) were assessed 1 year after implantation. VSP and HPSAP groups (20 and 23 patients, respectively) were compared against 40 healthy age-matched volunteers. Two-dimensional ultrasound speckle tracking imaging was used to obtain the global myocardial work index (GWI), global myocardial work efficiency (GWE), global myocardial constructive work (GCW), global myocardial wasted work (GWW), left ventricular stratified strain, and peak strain dispersion (PSD).

Results

GWI, GWE, and GCW parameters were improved in HPSAP compared to VSP, while GWW was significantly larger in the VSP group compared to the HPSAP group (all p < 0.05). HPSAP outperformed the VSP group in comparisons of global left ventricular longitudinal strain and stratified strain. Compared to controls, the GCW of all segmental myocardium (17/17 segments) in the VSP group was significantly reduced, while 70.59% (12/17 segments) in the HPSAP group was lower than the control group. GCW in the left ventricular segment of the HPSAP group was bigger than the VSP group (29.41%; 5/17 segments) and mainly concentrated in the ventricular septum and inferior wall.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that HPSAP performance outcomes are improved over VSP after 1 year, especially in left ventricular contractile synchrony, and HPSAP is beneficial to the effective myocardial work of the left ventricle.

Delta Increment in Pacing QRS Duration Predicts Cardiovascular Mortality in Patients with Pre-Existing Bundle Branch Block Receiving Permanent Pacemakers

BACKGROUND

The clinical implication of pre-existing intraventricular conduction disturbance (IVCD) in permanent pacemaker (PPM) recipients is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the clinical outcomes in patients with pre-existing IVCD after implantation of PPMs.

METHODS

A total of 1424 patients who received PPMs were categorized into three groups by pre-procedural electrocardiography: patients without IVCD (n = 1045), patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB) (n = 309), and patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) (n = 70). The primary outcome was cardiovascular (CV) mortality. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to determine the optimal cut-off values of variable in predicting CV mortality.

RESULTS

During follow-up, there was no significant difference in CV mortality between patients with and without IVCD. In multivariate analysis, independent predictors of CV mortality were age [hazard ratio (HR): 1.03; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.00-1.05; p = 0.026], history of heart failure [HR: 1.98; 95% CI: 1.19-3.29; p = 0.009], chronic kidney disease [HR: 1.75; 95% CI: 1.11-2.74; p = 0.015] and increment in pacing QRS duration [HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 1.00-1.04; p = 0.038]. Delta increments in pacing QRS duration ≥ 43 msec [HR: 2.91; 95% CI: 1.23-6.83; p = 0.014] in patients with pre-existing RBBB, and ≥ 33 msec [HR: 11.44; 95% CI: 2.03-64.30; p = 0.006] in patients with pre-existing LBBB were independent determinants of CV mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in CV mortality between patients with or without IVCD. However, wider pacing QRS duration increased the risk of CV mortality in PPM recipients, and delta increment in pacing QRS duration increased the risk of CV mortality in patients with pre-existing IVCD.

Initial Experience with Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing with Conventional Stylet-Driven Extendable Screw-In Leads and New Pre-Shaped Delivery Sheaths

Until recently, left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAp) has mostly been performed using lumen-less fixed screw leads. There are limited data on LBBAp with conventional style-driven extendable screw-in (SDES) leads, particularly data performed by operators with no previous experience with LBBAp procedures. In total, 42 consecutive patients undergoing LBBAp using SDES leads and newly designed delivery sheaths (LBBAp group) were compared with those treated with conventional right ventricular pacing (RVp) for atrioventricular block (RVp group, n = 84) using propensity score matching (1:2 ratio). The LBBAp was successful in 83% (35/42) of patients, with satisfactory pacing thresholds (0.8 ± 0.2 V at 0.4 ms). In the LBBAp group, the mean paced-QRS duration obtained during RV apical pacing (173 ± 18 ms) was significantly reduced by LBBAp (116 ± 14 ms, p < 0.001). Compared with the RVp group, the LBBAp group showed more physiological pacing, suggested by a much narrower paced-QRS duration (116 ± 14 vs. 151 ± 21 ms, p < 0.001). The pacing threshold was comparable in both groups. The LBBAp group revealed stable pacing thresholds for 6.8 ± 4.8 months post-implant and no serious complications including lead dislodgement or septal perforation. The novel approach of LBBAp using SDES leads and the new dedicated pre-shaped delivery sheaths was effectively and safely performed, even by inexperienced operators with LBBAp procedures.

Therapeutic Effect of His-Purkinje System Pacing Proportion on Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Patients With Heart Failure

Background

His-Purkinje system pacing (HPSP) combined with atrioventricular node ablation is an effective therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with heart failure (HF). However, atrioventricular node ablation has some limitations and disadvantages. HPSP combined with β -blockers reduces intrinsic heart rate and increases pacing proportion, which may be an alternative to HPSP combined with atrioventricular node ablation. This study was to assess the therapeutic effect of different HPSP proportion on AF patients with HF.

Methods

The study enrolled 30 consecutive persistent AF patients with HF who underwent HPSP. Heart rate was controlled by medical therapy. NYHA class, NT-proBNP, echocardiographic parameters were assessed at follow-up. MACE was defined as the composite endpoint of readmission for HF and cardiac mortality.

Results

The AUC of pacing proportion for predicting MACE was 0.830 (SE = 0.140, 95%CI:0.649–0.941, p = 0.018), the optimal cut-off point of pacing proportion to predict MACE by ROC analysis was 71% (sensitivity:83.3%, specificity: 91.7%). In high pacing proportion group (&gt;71%), there were significant improvements of NYHA class, NT-proBNP, LVEF and LVEDD from the baseline in wide QRS complex (QRSd&gt;120 ms) patients and HFrEF patients at half year follow-up, and there were significant improvements in NYHA class, NT-proBNP from baseline in narrow QRS complex (QRSd ≤ 120 ms) patients and HFpEF patients at half year follow-up, moderate but no significant improvements of LVEF and LVEDD were observed in these patients. In low pacing proportion group (≤ 71%), there were no significant improvements of NT-proBNP, LVEDD or LVEF regardless of baseline QRS duration or LVEF (p &gt; 0.05).

Conclusion

High pacing proportion (&gt;71%) of HPSP can improve clinical outcomes and echocardiographic parameters in persistent AF patients with wide QRS complex or HFrEF, and clinical outcomes in persistent AF patients with narrow QRS complex or HFpEF. High pacing proportion of HPSP has a beneficial effect on the prognosis of persistent AF patients with HF.

ECG and Pacing Criteria for Differentiating Conduction System Pacing from Myocardial Pacing

During His-Purkinje conduction system (HPS) pacing, it is crucial to confirm capture of the His bundle or left bundle branch versus myocardialonly capture. For this, several methods and criteria for differentiation between non-selective (ns) capture - capture of the HPS and the adjacent myocardium - and myocardial-only capture were developed. HPS capture results in faster and more homogenous depolarisation of the left ventricle than right ventricular septal (RVS) myocardial-only capture. Specifically, the depolarisation of the left ventricle (LV) does not require slow cell-to-cell spread of activation from the right side to the left side of the interventricular septum but begins simultaneously with QRS onset as in native depolarisation. These phenomena greatly influence QRS complex morphology and form the basis of electrocardiographic differentiation between HPS and myocardial paced QRS. Moreover, the HPS and the working myocardium are different tissues within the heart muscle that vary not only in conduction velocities but also in refractoriness and capture thresholds. These last two differences can be exploited for the diagnosis of HPS capture using dynamic pacing manoeuvres, namely differential output pacing, programmed stimulation and burst pacing. This review summarises current knowledge of this subject.

The Atrioventricular Conduction Axis and its Implications for Permanent Pacing

Extensive knowledge of the anatomy of the atrioventricular conduction axis, and its branches, is key to the success of permanent physiological pacing, either by capturing the His bundle, the left bundle branch or the adjacent septal regions. The inter-individual variability of the axis plays an important role in underscoring the technical difficulties known to exist in achieving a stable position of the stimulating leads. In this review, the key anatomical features of the location of the axis relative to the triangle of Koch, the aortic root, the inferior pyramidal space and the inferoseptal recess are summarised. In keeping with the increasing number of implants aimed at targeting the environs of the left bundle branch, an extensive review of the known variability in the pattern of ramification of the left bundle branch from the axis is included. This permits the authors to summarise in a pragmatic fashion the most relevant aspects to be taken into account when seeking to successfully deploy a permanent pacing lead.

Left ventricular activation time and pattern are preserved with both selective and nonselective His bundle pacing

BACKGROUND

His bundle pacing (HBP) can be achieved in 2 ways: selective HBP (S-HBP), where the His bundle is captured alone, and nonselective HBP (NS-HBP), where local myocardium is also captured, resulting a pre-excited electrocardiogram appearance.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the impact of this ventricular pre-excitation on left and right ventricular dyssynchrony.

METHODS

We recruited patients who displayed both S-HBP and NS-HBP. We performed noninvasive epicardial electrical mapping for left and right ventricular activation time (LVAT and RVAT) and pattern.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were recruited. In the primary analysis, the mean within-patient change in LVAT from S-HBP to NS-HBP was -5.5 ms (95% confidence interval: -0.6 to -10.4, noninferiority P < .0001). NS-HBP did not prolong RVAT (4.3 ms, -4.0 to 12.8, P = .296) but did prolong QRS duration (QRSd, 22.1 ms, 11.8 to 32.4, P = .0003). In patients with narrow intrinsic QRS (n = 6), NS-HBP preserved LVAT (-2.9 ms, -9.7 to 4.0, P = .331) but prolonged QRS duration (31.4 ms, 22.0 to 40.7, P = .0003) and mean RVAT (16.8 ms, -5.3 to 38.9, P = .108) compared to S-HBP. Activation pattern of the left ventricular surface was unchanged between S-HBP and NS-HBP, but NS-HBP produced early basal right ventricular activation that was not seen in S-HBP.

CONCLUSION

Compared to S-HBP, local myocardial capture during NS-HBP produces pre-excitation of the basal right ventricle resulting in QRS duration prolongation. However, NS-HBP preserves the left ventricular activation time and pattern of S-HBP. Left ventricular dyssynchrony is not an important factor when choosing between S-HBP and NS-HBP in most patients.

Simple is Complicated

Collapse

Troubleshooting Programming of Conduction System Pacing

Conduction system pacing (CSP) comprises His bundle pacing and left bundle branch area pacing and is rapidly gaining widespread adoption. Effective CSP not only depends on successful system implantation but also on proper device programming. Current implantable impulse generators are not specifically designed for CSP. Either single chamber, dual chamber or CRT devices can be used for CSP depending on the underlying heart rhythm (sinus rhythm or permanent atrial arrhythmia) and the aim of pacing. Different programming issues may arise depending on the device configuration. This article aims to provide an update on practical considerations for His bundle and left bundle branch area pacing programming and follow-up.

Safety and efficacy of His-bundle pacing/left bundle branch area pacing versus right ventricular pacing: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have demonstrated that right ventricular pacing (RVP) has deleterious effects on non-synchronized ventricular contraction, while His-bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) contribute to improvements in patients' mid- and long-term outcomes. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of physiologic pacing (HBP/LBBaP) versus those of RVP.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase was conducted for studies that compared the effects of physiologic pacing and RVP. All eligible studies were published before January 1, 2021 and were conducted in humans. STATA software version 15.0 was used for all the data analyses.

RESULTS

Twenty articles (n = 2787 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. Compared to RVP, physiologic pacing was associated with a significantly shorter QRS duration and better cardiac function. Physiologic pacing was also correlated with lower rates of mitral regurgitation, pacing-induced cardiomyopathy, death, heart failure hospitalization, and atrial fibrillation, although the above results were not statistically significant. In addition, RVP led to the achievement of higher success rates than physiologic pacing, a shorter fluoroscopic time and mean procedure duration, a lower pacing threshold: the results were statistically significant. Compared with HBP, LBBaP appeared to have some advantages in R wave amplitudes, pacing threshold, fluoroscopic time, procedure time, and success rate, with statistically significant differences. Whereas HBP was associated with fewer surgical complications and shorter QRS duration, the results were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Physiologic pacing (HBP/LBBaP) might be a better strategy than RVP and improve long-term clinical outcomes like cardiac function. Although LBBaP appears to have some advantages over HBP, the long-term benefits are still controversial. More large-scale randomized clinical trials are needed for further verification.

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.

His-bundle pacing as an alternative to CRT in a patient with left bundle branch block, left ventricular dysfunction, and TAVI-induced complete AV block

Our clinical case supports the effectiveness of distal His-Bundle pacing in obtaining ventricular resynchronization in patients with LBBB and left ventricular dysfunction, particularly in the context of post-TAVI conduction disturbances.