Novel electroanatomical map for permanent his bundle pacing: the Mont Blanc approach - influence of the learning curve and procedural outcome

AIMS

Pacing the specific conduction system like the Bundle of His (HB) can lead to more physiologic activation patterns compared to traditional right ventricular apical pacing. The aim of this study was to estimate the feasibility and value of electroanatomical mapping (EAM) for HB pacing during the learning curve and its impact on procedural outcome.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Fifteen consecutive patients were treated using EAM of the His bundle region before implantation. Voltage and activation maps of HB potentials were performed. The activation time from His potential to R wave (ECG-reference) was measured and correlated to the HV interval. The atrial and ventricular potentials were blended so the active window could only see the His potential. After completing the activation map, it was transformed into a peak-to-peak voltage map of the HB. With reversed black and white colour scale, the exact point of the maximal His signal amplitude was visualized. Procedural data for the implantation were analysed using this innovative approach. The average total procedural time and fluoroscopy time was 88.2 ± 19.1 min and 10.9 ± 4.5 min, respectively. The 3D mapping time was 18.4 ± 5.1 min. The 13.9 ± 5.1 His potential points were needed in average to complete the map. No periprocedural complications were seen in this cohort. In 86.7% of cases, His bundle pacing was successful. The average threshold for the His bundle stimulation and the R-wave amplitude was 1.62 ± 1 V (@1.0 ms) and 4.8 ± 3.2 mV, respectively. The pacing impedance was 513.5 ± 102.8 Ω. Average paced QRS complex width was 116.9 ± 20.3ms. On average 2.6 ± 1.6 lead positions were targeted to find the optimal pacing site.

CONCLUSION

Electroanatomical mapping-guided implantation of His-bundle leads can facilitate the identification of optimal pacing sites and allow to minimize procedure and fluoroscopy times even during the phase of the learning curve.

His bundle pacing, learning curve, procedure characteristics, safety, and feasibility: Insights from a large international observational study

Background

His‐bundle pacing (HBP) provides physiological ventricular activation. Observational studies have demonstrated the techniques’ feasibility; however, data have come from a limited number of centers.

Objectives

We set out to explore the contemporary global practice in HBP focusing on the learning curve, procedural characteristics, and outcomes.

Methods

This is a retrospective, multicenter observational study of patients undergoing attempted HBP at seven centers. Pacing indication, fluoroscopy time, HBP thresholds, and lead reintervention and deactivation rates were recorded. Where centers had systematically recorded implant success rates from the outset, these were collated.

Results

A total of 529 patients underwent attempted HBP during the study period (2014‐19) with a mean follow‐up of 217 ± 303 days. Most implants were for bradycardia indications.

In the three centers with the systematic collation of all attempts, the overall implant success rate was 81%, which improved to 87% after completion of 40 cases.

All seven centers reported data on successful implants. The mean fluoroscopy time was 11.7 ± 12.0 minutes, the His‐bundle capture threshold at implant was 1.4 ± 0.9 V at 0.8 ± 0.3 ms, and it was 1.3 ± 1.2 V at 0.9 ± 0.2 ms at last device check.

HBP lead reintervention or deactivation (for lead displacement or rise in threshold) occurred in 7.5% of successful implants.

There was evidence of a learning curve: fluoroscopy time and HBP capture threshold reduced with greater experience, plateauing after approximately 30‐50 cases.

Conclusion

We found that it is feasible to establish a successful HBP program, using the currently available implantation tools. For physicians who are experienced at pacemaker implantation, the steepest part of the learning curve appears to be over the first 30‐50 cases.