A Dual-Chamber Leadless Pacemaker.

BACKGROUND: Single-chamber ventricular leadless pacemakers do not support atrial pacing or consistent atrioventricular synchrony. A dual-chamber leadless pacemaker system consisting of two devices implanted percutaneously, one in the right atrium and one in the right ventricle, would make leadless pacemaker therapy a treatment option for a wider range of indications. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, single-group study to evaluate the safety and performance of a dual-chamber leadless pacemaker system. Patients with a conventional indication for dual-chamber pacing were eligible for participation. The primary safety end point was freedom from complications (i.e., device- or procedure-related serious adverse events) at 90 days. The first primary performance end point was a combination of adequate atrial capture threshold and sensing amplitude at 3 months. The second primary performance end point was at least 70% atrioventricular synchrony at 3 months while the patient was sitting. RESULTS: Among the 300 patients enrolled, 190 (63.3%) had sinus-node dysfunction and 100 (33.3%) had atrioventricular block as the primary pacing indication. The implantation procedure was successful (i.e., two functioning leadless pacemakers were implanted and had established implant-to-implant communication) in 295 patients (98.3%). A total of 35 device- or procedure-related serious adverse events occurred in 29 patients. The primary safety end point was met in 271 patients (90.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 87.0 to 93.7), which exceeded the performance goal of 78% (P<0.001). The first primary performance end point was met in 90.2% of the patients (95% CI, 86.8 to 93.6), which exceeded the performance goal of 82.5% (P<0.001). The mean (±SD) atrial capture threshold was 0.82±0.70 V, and the mean P-wave amplitude was 3.58±1.88 mV. Of the 21 patients (7%) with a P-wave amplitude of less than 1.0 mV, none required device revision for inadequate sensing. At least 70% atrioventricular synchrony was achieved in 97.3% of the patients (95% CI, 95.4 to 99.3), which exceeded the performance goal of 83% (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The dual-chamber leadless pacemaker system met the primary safety end point and provided atrial pacing and reliable atrioventricular synchrony for 3 months after implantation. (Funded by Abbott Medical; Aveir DR i2i ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05252702.).

Left bundle branch pacing versus left ventricular septal pacing as a primary procedural endpoint during left bundle branch area pacing: Evaluation of two different implant strategies.

INTRODUCTION: Implant procedure features and clinical implications of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) have not been yet fully described. We sought to compare two different left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) implant strategies: the first one accepting LVSP as a procedural endpoint and the second one aiming at achieving LBBP in every patient in spite of evidence of previous LVSP criteria. METHODS: LVSP was accepted as a procedural endpoint in 162 consecutive patients (LVSP strategy group). In a second phase, LBBP was attempted in every patient in spite of achieving previous LVSP criteria (n = 161, LBBP strategy group). Baseline patient characteristics, implant procedure, and follow-up data were compared. RESULTS: The final capture pattern was LBBP in 71.4% and LVSP in 24.2% in the LBBP strategy group compared to 42.7% and 50%, respectively, in the LVSP strategy group. One hundred and eighty-four patients (57%) had proven LBB capture criteria with a significantly shorter paced QRS duration than the 120 patients (37%) with LVSP criteria (115 ± 9 vs. 121 ± 13 ms, p < .001). Implant parameters were comparable between the two strategies but the LBBP strategy resulted in a higher rate of acute septal perforation (11.8% vs. 4.9%, p = .026) without any clinical sequelae. Patients with CRT indications significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) during follow-up irrespective of the capture pattern (from 35 ± 11% to 45 ± 14% in proven LBBP, p = .024; and from 39 ± 13% to 47 ± 12% for LVSP, p = .003). The presence of structural heart disease and baseline LBBB independently predicted unsuccessful LBB capture. CONCLUSION: The LBBP strategy was associated with comparable implant parameters than the LVSP strategy but resulted in higher rates of septal perforation. Proven LBB capture and LVSP showed comparable effects on LVEF during follow-up.

Feasibility of a novel atrial mechanical sensing method for leadless atrioventricular synchronous pacing.

INTRODUCTION: Few studies have demonstrated a high degree of atrioventricular (AV) synchrony with a new leadless pacemaker called Micra AV. Our group previously reported a new and unique sensing method. We believe that this novel sensing method, "Simplified A3 method," might facilitate better AV synchrony than a conventional sensing method in almost all cases with Micra AV implantation. METHODS: We conducted a non-randomized retrospective study comparing the two pacing methods at two centers. From December 1, 2021 to October 31, 2022, Micra AV was implanted for 32 patients at the two centers. Twenty of the 32 patients with sinus rhythm and complete AV block were included in this study. In Group 1, the conventional setting was programmed as follows: auto A3 threshold, auto A3 window-end (WE), and auto A4 threshold turned on during hospitalization. In Group 2, the "Simplified A3 method" was programmed as follows: auto A3 threshold and auto A3WE turned off. Instead, an intentionally prolonged A3WE (850-1000 ms) and low A3 threshold (A3 signal amplitude + 0.5-1.0 m/s2) were programmed. RESULTS: Twenty patients were analyzed. In Group 2, AV synchrony (%AMVp) was significantly higher at the first outpatient clinic (63.0 ± 5.7% vs 81.0 ± 4.2%, p = .03). A3 threshold was significantly lower in Group 2 (5.9 ± 0.7 m/s2, p < .05 vs 2.3 ± 0.5 m/s2, p < .05). CONCLUSION: Our novel sensing method might be a more feasible sensing method for obtaining higher AV synchrony than the conventional algorithm.

Delivery catheter system carries more physiological right ventricular septal pacing than stylet system.

INTRODUCTION: The Mt. FUJI multicenter trial demonstrated that a delivery catheter system had a higher rate of successful right ventricular (RV) lead deployment on the RV septum (RVS) than a conventional stylet system. In this subanalysis of the Mt. FUJI trial, we assessed the differences in electrocardiogram (ECG) parameters during RV pacing between a delivery catheter system and a stylet system and their associations with the lead tip positions. METHODS: Among 70 patients enrolled in the Mt FUJI trial, ECG parameters, RV lead tip positions, and lead depth inside the septum assessed by computed tomography were compared between the catheter group (n = 36) and stylet group (n = 34). RESULTS: The paced QRS duration (QRS-d), corrected paced QT (QTc), and JT interval (JTc) were significantly shorter in the catheter group than in the stylet group (QRS-d: 130 ± 19 vs. 142 ± 15 ms, p = .004; QTc: 476 ± 25 vs. 514 ± 20 ms, p < .001; JTc: 347 ± 24 vs. 372 ± 17 ms, p < .001). This superiority of the catheter group was maintained in a subgroup analysis of patients with an RV lead tip position at the septum. The lead depth inside the septum was greater in the catheter group than in the stylet group, and there was a significant negative correlation between the paced QRS-d and the lead depth. CONCLUSION: Using a delivery catheter system carries more physiological depolarization and repolarization during RVS pacing and deeper screw penetration in the septum in comparison to conventional stylet system. The lead depth could have a more impact on the ECG parameters rather than the type of pacing lead.

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.

Advances in cardiac pacing with leadless pacemakers and conduction system pacing.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The field of cardiac pacing has undergone significant evolution with the introduction and adoption of conduction system pacing (CSP) and leadless pacemakers (LLPMs). These innovations provide benefits over conventional pacing methods including avoiding lead related complications and achieving more physiological cardiac activation. This review critically assesses the latest advancements in CSP and LLPMs, including their benefits, challenges, and potential for future growth. RECENT FINDINGS: CSP, especially of the left bundle branch area, enhances ventricular depolarization and cardiac mechanics. Recent studies show CSP to be favorable over traditional pacing in various patient populations, with an increase in its global adoption. Nevertheless, challenges related to lead placement and long-term maintenance persist. Meanwhile, LLPMs have emerged in response to complications from conventional pacemaker leads. Two main types, Aveir and Micra, have demonstrated improved outcomes and adoption over time. The incorporation of new technologies allows LLPMs to cater to broader patient groups, and their integration with CSP techniques offers exciting potential. SUMMARY: The advancements in CSP and LLPMs present a transformative shift in cardiac pacing, with evidence pointing towards enhanced clinical outcomes and reduced complications. Future innovations and research are likely to further elevate the clinical impact of these technologies, ensuring improved patient care for those with conduction system disorders.

Canine Model of Ischemia-Induced Ventricular Tachycardia.

INTRODUCTION: Despite advances in antiarrhythmia therapies, ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a leading cause of sudden cardiac death. Investigation into the characteristics and new treatments for this arrhythmia is required to improve outcomes and a reproducible model of VT would be useful in these endeavors. We therefore created a canine model of ischemia-induced VT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A pacing lead was implanted in the right ventricle in canines (n = 13) and the left anterior descending artery was occluded in two locations for 2 h and subsequently released to create an ischemia-reperfusion injury. In the 10 dogs that survived the first 48 h following the initial study, a terminal study was conducted 4-7 d later and VT was induced using premature stimulation or burst pacing through the right ventricle lead. The arrhythmia was terminated using either antitachycardia pacing or a defibrillatory shock. Multiple inductions into sustained VT were attempted. RESULTS: Sustained VT was induced in eight of 10 dogs with an average cycle length of 335 ± 70 bpm. Multiple episodes of VT were induced. Episodes of VT exhibited different electrocardiogram morphologies and cycle lengths in individual animals. CONCLUSIONS: This canine model provides a consistent technique for inducing multiple episodes of sustained VT. It may be useful for investigating VT mechanisms and testing novel therapeutics and treatments for patients with VT.

Aveir VR real-world performance and chronic pacing threshold prediction using mapping and fixation electrical data.

AIMS: Aveir VR performance and predictors for its pacing threshold (PCT) in a real-world cohort were investigated. METHODS: Electrical measurements at various stages of an Aveir VR implant were prospectively collected. Predictors for 3-month PCT were studied. A retrospective cohort of consecutive 139 Micra implants was used to compare the PCT evolution. High PCT was defined as ≥1.5 V, using a pulse width of 0.4 ms for Aveir and 0.24 ms for Micra. Excellent PCT was defined as ≤0.5 V at the respective pulse width. RESULTS: Among the 123 consecutive Aveir VR implant attempts, 122 (99.2%) were successful. The majority were of advanced age (mean 79.7) and small body size (mean BSA 1.60). Two patients (1.6%) experienced complications, including one pericardial effusion after device reposition and one intraoperative device dislodgement. Eighty-eight patients reached a 3-month follow-up. Aveir 3-month PCT was correlated with impedance at mapping (P = 0.015), tether mode (P < 0.001), end-of-procedure (P < 0.001), and mapping PCT (P = 0.035), but not with PCTs after fixation (P > 0.05). Tether mode impedance >470 ohms had 88% sensitivity and 71% specificity in predicting excellent 3-month PCT. Although it is more common for Aveir to have high PCT at end of procedure (11.5% for Aveir and 2.2% for Micra, P = 0.004), the rate at 3 months was similar (2.3% for Aveir and 3.1% for Micra, P = 1.000). CONCLUSION: Aveir VR demonstrated satisfactory performance in this high-risk cohort. Pacing thresholds tend to improve to a greater extent than Micra after implantation. The PCT after fixation, even after a waiting period, has limited predictive value for the chronic threshold. Low-mapping PCT and high intraoperative impedance predict chronic low PCT.

Current of injury amplitude during left bundle branch area pacing implantation: impact of filter settings, ventricular pacing, and lead type.

AIMS: Monitoring current of injury (COI) during left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) implantation is useful to evaluate lead depth. Technical aspects for recording COI amplitude have not been well studied. Our aims were to evaluate the impact of high-pass filter settings on electrogram recordings during LBBAP implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients with successful LBBAP implantation had unipolar recordings of COI at final lead position at different high-pass filter settings (0.01-1 Hz) from the tip electrode during sensing and pacing, and from the ring electrode during sensing. Duration of saturation-induced signal loss was also measured at each filter setting. COI amplitudes were compared between lumenless and stylet-driven leads. A total of 156 patients (96 males, aged 81.4 ± 9.6 years) were included. Higher filter settings led to significantly lower COI amplitudes. In 50 patients with COI amplitude < 10 mV, the magnitude of the drop was on average 1-1.5 mV (and up to 4 mV) between 0.05 and 0.5 Hz, meaning that cut-offs may not be used interchangeably. Saturation-induced signal loss was on average 10 s at 0.05 Hz and only 2 s with 0.5 Hz. When pacing was interrupted, the sensed COI amplitude varied (either higher or lower) by up to 4 mV, implying that it is advisable to periodically interrupt pacing to evaluate the sensed COI when reaching levels of ∼10 mV. Lead type did not impact COI amplitude. CONCLUSION: High-pass filters have a significant impact on electrogram characteristics at LBBAP implantation, with the 0.5 Hz settings having the most favourable profile.

Temporal relationship between haemodynamic changes and activation of closed-loop stimulation during a tilt-induced vasovagal syncope.

AIMS: A dual-chamber pacemaker with closed-loop stimulation (CLS) mode is effective in reducing syncopal recurrences in patients with asystolic vasovagal syncope (VVS). In this study, we explored the haemodynamic and temporal relationship of CLS during a tilt-induced vasovagal reflex. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty patients underwent a tilt test under video recording 3.9 years after CLS pacemaker implantation. Three patients were excluded from the analysis because of no VVS induced by the tilt test (n = 1) and protocol violation (n = 2). In 14 of the remaining 17 patients, CLS pacing emerged during the pre-syncopal phase of circulatory instability when the mean intrinsic heart rate (HR) was 88 ± 12 b.p.m. and systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 108 ± 19 mmHg. The CLS pacing rate thereafter rapidly increased to 105 ± 14 b.p.m. within a median of 0.1 min [inter-quartile range (IQR), 0.1-0.7 min] when the SBP was 99 ± 21 mmHg. At the time of maximum vasovagal effect (syncope or pre-syncope), SBP was 63 ± 17 mmHg and the CLS rate was 95 ± 13 b.p.m. The onset of CLS pacing was 1.7 min (IQR, 1.5-3.4) before syncope or lowest SBP. The total duration of CLS pacing was 5.0 min (IQR, 3.3-8.3). Closed-loop stimulation pacing was not observed in three patients who had a similar SBP decrease from 142 ± 22 mmHg at baseline to 69 ± 4 mmHg at the time of maximum vasovagal effect, but there was no significant increase in HR (59 ± 1 b.p.m.). CONCLUSION: The reproducibility of a vasovagal reflex was high. High-rate CLS pacing was observed early during the pre-syncopal phase in most patients and persisted, although attenuated, at the time of maximum vasovagal effect. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06038708.

Septal venous channel perforation during left bundle branch area pacing: a prospective study.

AIMS: To characterize the diagnosis, frequency, and procedural implications of septal venous channel perforation during left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP). METHODS AND RESULTS: All consecutive patients undergoing LBBAP over an 8-month period were prospectively studied. During lead placement, obligatory septal contrast injection was performed twice, at initiation (implant entry zone) and at completion (fixation zone). An intuitive fluoroscopic schema using orthogonal views (left anterior oblique/right anterior oblique) and familiar landmarks is described. Using this, we resolved zonal distribution (I-VI) of lead position on the ventricular septum and its angulation (post-fixation angle θ). Subjects with and without septal venous channel perforation were compared. Sixty-one patients {male 57.3%, median age [interquartile range (IQR)] 69.5 [62.5-74.5] years} were enrolled. Septal venous channel perforation was observed in eight (13.1%) patients [male 28.5%, median age (IQR) 64 (50-75) years]. They had higher frequency of (i) right-sided implant (25% vs. 1.9%, P = 0.04), (ii) fixation in zone III at the mid-superior septum (75% vs. 28.3%, P = 0.04), (iii) steeper angle of fixation-median θ (IQR) [19 (10-30)° vs. 5 (4-19)°, P = 0.01], and (iv) longer median penetrated-lead length (IQR) [13 (10-14.8) vs. 10 (8.5-12.5) mm, P = 0.03]. Coronary sinus drainage of contrast was noted in five (62.5%) patients. Abnormal impedance drops during implantation (12.5% vs. 5.7%, P = NS) were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: When evaluated systematically, septal venous channel perforation may be encountered commonly after LBBAP. The fiducial reference framework described using fluoroscopic imaging identified salient associated findings. This may be addressed with lead repositioning to a more inferior location and is not associated with adverse consequence acutely or in early follow-up.

The power of three: Atrial rate limit power-on-reset - A non-electromagnetic cause of pacemaker-induced extracardiac stimulation.

BACKGROUND: Power-on reset (PoR) is most commonly due to electromagnetic interference. Full PoR results in a switch to an inhibited mode (VVI) pacing and resets pacing outputs to maximal unipolar settings, leading to extracardiac stimulation. METHODS: We present a case of PoR occurrence in the absence of electromagnetic interference, resulting in pectoral stimulation triggered by violation of the atrial rate limit. CONCLUSIONS: It is useful for clinicians to recognizethe occurrence of PoR in the setting of atrial limit violation andthe appropriate management in such circumstances.

Optimizing conduction system pacing lead placement utilizing the image overlay technique.

The His-bundle has several locations from which conduction system pacing can be achieved. Some locations offer better sensing, thresholds and paced QRS durations. Existing techniques to aid repositioning of an already deployed, but sub-optimally placed lead, include either simple memory of the initial lead position combined with its observation on an x-ray review screen or utilizing an additional vascular access and pacing lead with the first lead serving as a real-time marker (Two-lead technique). We describe a novel, readily available, cost-efficient, imaging-based approach to assist in the re-positioning of a pacing lead for His-bundle pacing (the Image Overlay Technique).

Single operator experience, learning curve, outcomes, and insights gained with conduction system pacing.

BACKGROUND: Conduction system pacing (CSP) is increasingly utilized to prevent and correct dyssynchrony. Barriers to CSP adoption include limited training, methodologic variability, laboratory slot allocation, and few data on learning curves. We report learning curves/clinical outcomes from a single experienced electrophysiologist who was new to CSP, and share gained insights. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent attempted CSP implantation (2016-2023). Patient characteristics, ECGs, echocardiograms, fluoroscopy/procedure times, lead data were recorded at implant and follow-up. RESULTS: CSP leads were implanted successfully in 167/191(87.4%) patients with a follow-up of 278 ± 378 days. His-bundle pacing (HBP = 59) and left-bundle-area pacing (LBAP = 108) had similar procedure/fluoroscopy times, QRS duration decreases, and ejection fraction improvements (all p > NS). Eight HBP lead revisions were required for high capture thresholds LBAP demonstrated lower pacing thresholds, higher lead impedances, and greater R-wave amplitudes at implant and follow-up. After 25 HBP cases, implant pacing thresholds, fluoroscopy, procedural times did not decrease. After 25 LBAP cases, there were significant decreases in all these parameters (p < 0.05). A separate analysis in LBAP patients with recorded Purkinje signals showed no differences in paced ECG characteristics between patients with pre- QRS Purkinje signals versus patients with Purkinje signals post-QRS onset. CONCLUSIONS: Experienced implanters who are new to CSP can achieve steady-state procedural/fluoroscopy times after a learning curve of 25 implants. LBAP showed lower capture thresholds and higher success rates. Adequate depth of lead deployment (as determined by published parameters) does not require Purkinje potential to be pre-QRS. Operators new to CSP.can forego HBP and directly implement LBAP.

Beyond biventricular pacing: Exploring the advantages of his-bundle pacing and left bundle branch pacing in heart failure-A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis compares His-Purkinje system pacing (HPSP), a novel cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) technique that targets the intrinsic conduction system of the heart, with conventional biventricular pacing (BiVP) in heart failure (HF) patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and dyssynchrony. METHODS: We searched multiple databases up to May 2023 and identified 18 studies (five randomized controlled trials and 13 observational studies) involving 1291 patients. The outcome measures were QRS duration, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) change, HF hospitalization, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class improvement. We used a random-effects model to calculate odds ratios (OR), and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We also assessed the methodological quality of the studies. RESULTS: The mean LVEF was 30.7% and the mean follow-up duration was 8.1 months. Among LBBP, HBP, and BiVP, HBP provided the shortest QRS duration [MD: -18.84 ms, 95% CI: -28.74 to -8.94; p = 0.0002], while LBBP showed the greatest improvement in LVEF [MD: 5.74, 95% CI: 2.74 to 7.46; p < 0.0001], LVEDD [MD: -5.55 mm, 95% CI: -7.51 to -3.59; p < 0.00001], and NYHA functional class [MD: -0.58, 95% CI: -0.80 to --0.35; p < 0.00001]. However, there was no significant difference in HF hospitalization between HPSP and BiVP. CONCLUSION: LBBP as modality of HPSP demonstrated superior outcomes in achieving electrical ventricular synchrony and systolic function, as well as alleviating HF symptoms, compared to other pacing techniques.

Coronary artery complications after left bundle branch area pacing: An increasingly reported issue in the era of physiologic pacing.

Coronary artery lesions related to pacemaker implantation are rare complications. With the increasing adoption of the technique of permanent transseptal pacing of the left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), an increase in the incidence of these complications may be expected. We report two cases of coronary lesions after permanent transeptal pacing of the LBBAP: the first with a small coronary artery fistula, and the second with an extrinsic coronary compression. Both complications occurred with stylet-driven pacing leads with extendable helix. In the first case, since the shunt volume was small and no major complications were reported, the patient was treated conservatively with good outcome. The second case required lead repositioning due to acute decompensated heart failure.

His potential injury as the end point of screwing by a continuous recording technique in His bundle pacing: A case report.

BACKGROUND: His bundle pacing (HBP) engaged electrical activation of both ventricles by stimulating the His-Purkinje network, which could avoid marked ventricles dyssynchrony. The lead was given three to five clockwise rotations at the site with the His potential to anchor the interventricular septum. In 2018, the Multicenter His Bundle Pacing Collaborative Working Group recommended that the His bundle capture threshold should be lower than 2.5 V/1 ms in non-pacing-dependent patients, and pacing-dependent patients should have a lower adjacent ventricular capture threshold as self-backup. Therefore, to avoid safety issues such as loss of capture caused by increased threshold, we believe that more stringent criteria should be adopted in patients with atrioventricular block (AVB). In previous studies, the connection cable needed to be disconnected during the screwing. When the procedure was finished, the performer found that the patients with His bundle injury could obtain a lower threshold than those without His bundle injury. Although no studies of new bundle branch block (BBB) or AVB by the acute His bundle injury was reported. However, It is worrying that the damage of His bundle seems random during the procedure. How to balance avoiding severe injury with a lower capture threshold? At present, we report a case of light His injury and lower His capture threshold under continuous intracardiac electrocardiogram monitoring.

Upper turnaround point in a reentry circuit of the idiopathic left posterior fascicular ventricular tachycardia.

BACKGROUND: The anatomic extent of the reentry circuit in idiopathic left posterior fascicular ventricular tachycardia (LPF-VT) is yet to be fully elucidated. We hypothesized that entrainment mapping could be used to delineate the reentry circuit of an LPF-VT, especially including the upper turnaround point. METHODS: Twenty-three consecutive LPF-VT patients (mean age, 29 ± 9 years, 18 males) were included. We performed overdrive pacing with entrainment attempts at the left bundle branch (LBB) and the left His bundle (HB) region. RESULTS: Overdrive pacing from the LBB region showed concealed fusion in all 23 patients (post-pacing interval [PPI], 322.1 ± 64.3 ms; tachycardia cycle length [TCL], 319.0 ± 61.6 ms; PPI-TCL, 3.1 ± 4.6 ms) with a long stimulus-to-QRS interval (287.9 ± 58.0 ms, approximately 90% of the TCL). Pacing from the same LBB region at a slightly faster pacing rate showed manifest fusion with antidromic conduction to the LBB and minimal in-and-out time to the LBB potential (PPI-TCL, 21.3 ± 13.7 ms). Overdrive pacing from the left HB region showed manifest fusion with a long PPI-TCL (53.9 ± 22.5 ms). CONCLUSIONS: Our pacing study results suggest that the upper turnaround point in a reentry circuit of the LPF-VT may extend to the proximal His-Purkinje conduction system near the LBB region but below the left HB region. The LPF may constitute the retrograde limb of the reentry circuit.

Output-dependent His bundle pacing: Unexpected His-Purkinje system pathology unmasking.

The anatomy of the His-Purkinje system has been studied, yet there remains a knowledge gap regarding the impact of His bundle pacing and its electrocardiographic implications. This case report highlights the presence of His-Purkinje system pathology without apparent clues on the surface electrocardiogram (EKG). By observing identical QRS morphology with varying HV intervals resulting from different pacing outputs, we demonstrate the presence of an electrical propagation block within the His bundle.

Outcomes of dual-chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator for left bundle branch area pacing: A systematic review of literature.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review of literature aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of dual-chamber ICDs for LBBAP in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB). METHODS: Digital databases were searched systematically to identify studies reporting the left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) with implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) placement in patients with LBBB. Detailed study and patient-level baseline characteristics including the type of study, sample size, follow-up, number of cases, age, gender, and baseline characteristics were abstracted. RESULTS: In a total of three studies, 34 patients were included in this review. There was a significant improvement reported in QRS duration in all studies. The mean QRS duration at baseline was 170 ± 17.4 ms, whereas the follow-up QRS duration at follow-up was 121 ± 17.3 ms. Two studies reported a significant improvement of 50% in LVEF from baseline. No lead-related complications or arrhythmic events were recorded in any study. The findings of the systematic review suggest that dual-chamber ICD for LBBAP is a promising intervention for patients with heart conditions. CONCLUSION: The procedure offers significant improvements in QRS duration and LVEF, and there were no lead-related complications or arrhythmic events recorded in any of the studies.