Difference of ventricular synchrony between LBBP, LBFP and LVSP: A speckle tracking echocardiographic study.

PURPOSE: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has emerged as a physiological and stable form of pacing. We aim to compare the mechanical ventricular synchrony of LBBP, LBFP, and LVSP. METHODS: Proximal Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP), left bundle fascicular pacing (LBFP) and left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) were identified in patients with bradycardia who successfully underwent LBBAP. Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% or QRS duration (QRSd) ≥ 120 ms were excluded. By using electrocardiograms, the left ventricular activation time (LVAT) and QRS duration (QRSd) were measured to examine electrophysiological synchrony. As indications of mechanical synchrony, global longitudinal strain (GLS), global circumferential strain (GCS), global radial strain (GRS), and peak strain dispersion (PSD) were evaluated by using 2-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography (2D-STE). RESULTS: In 56 patients, data were collected during LBBP (n = 18), LBFP (n = 16), and LVSP (n = 22). LVSP resulted in a longer LVAT (91.3 ± 14.9 ms) than LBBP (77.1 ± 10.8 ms, P < 0.05) and LBFP (72.1 ± 9.6 ms, P < 0.05), but all three groups had similar QRSd. There were no differences in GLS, GCS, GRS, or PSD between LBBP, LBFP, and LVSP. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with normal cardiac function and narrow QRS, though LBBAP with LBB capture resulted in better electrophysiological synchrony than without, the mechanical synchrony of the three groups was comparable.

Is the pacing site closer to the left ventricular septal endocardium in left bundle branch pacing or in left ventricular septal pacing?

PURPOSE: Distinguishing between left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) is challenging. This study aimed to compare the echocardiographic distance from the pacing lead tip to the left ventricular (LV) septal endocardium between patients who underwent LBBP and those who underwent LVSP successfully. METHODS: Fifty-nine consecutive patients (age 71.9 ± 12.0 years, 35.6% male) with traditional indications for permanent cardiac pacing were included (LBBP group, n = 46; LVSP group, n = 13). Unipolar pacing from the final pacing sites generated narrow QRS complexes with a right bundle branch block pattern in all patients. After the procedure, a physician blinded to the group allocation performed echocardiographic measurements of the distance between the lead tip and the LV septal endocardium. RESULTS: The mean paced QRS duration was comparable between the LBBP group and the LVSP group (105.3 ± 15.6 ms vs. 109.2 ± 9.6 ms, P = 0.287). In the LBBP group, the interval from the left bundle branch potential to QRS onset was 28.7 ± 9.0 ms. During diastole, the mean distance between the lead tip and the LV septal endocardium was 0.6 ± 0.9 mm in the LBBP group and 3.0 ± 1.6 mm in the LVSP group (P < 0.001). During systole, the distance was 1.5 ± 1.4 mm in the LBBP group and 4.3 ± 2.6 mm in the LVSP group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The landing zone of the lead tip was closer to the LV septal endocardium in the patients who underwent LBBP. There is a need for real-time intraprocedural monitoring of the distance between the lead tip and the LV septal endocardium when performing LBBP.

Treatment of Esophageal Hematoma After Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: A Case Report.

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an alternative to oral anticoagulation therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation who are at high risk for bleeding and thromboembolic events. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is the standard modality for intraprocedural imaging during LAAO. We report a rare case of extensive submucosal esophageal hematoma that developed after a TEE-guided LAAO procedure. The cause, management, and prevention of this complication are explored in depth in this report.