RESUMEN
The role of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)-related tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is increasingly recognized as an independent clinical entity. Hence, interventional TR treatment options continuously evolve, surgical risk assessment and peri-operative care improve the management of CIED-related TR, and the role of lead extraction is of high interest. Furthermore, novel surgical and interventional tricuspid valve treatment options are increasingly applied to patients suffering from TR associated with or related to CIEDs. This multidisciplinary review article developed with electrophysiologists, interventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, and cardiac surgeons aims to give an overview of the mechanisms of disease, diagnostics, and proposes treatment algorithms of patients suffering from TR associated with CIED lead(s) or leadless pacemakers.
Asunto(s)
Desfibriladores Implantables , Marcapaso Artificial , Cardiopatía Reumática , Insuficiencia de la Válvula Tricúspide , Humanos , Marcapaso Artificial/efectos adversos , Desfibriladores Implantables/efectos adversos , Válvula Tricúspide/diagnóstico por imagen , Válvula Tricúspide/cirugía , Insuficiencia de la Válvula Tricúspide/cirugía , Insuficiencia de la Válvula Tricúspide/complicaciones , Cardiopatía Reumática/complicaciones , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
The DF-4 defibrillator standard has been rapidly adopted due to its convenience at implantation. There are however trade-offs compared to the traditional DF-1 standard that are underappreciated. This viewpoint outlines the advantages and limitations of current defibrillator lead standards that should be kept in mind, as they impact the options that are available to deal with issues that may arise.
Asunto(s)
Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca , Desfibriladores Implantables , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Humanos , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapiaRESUMEN
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 (0.01-1â 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 < 10â mV, the magnitude of the drop was on average 1-1.5â mV (and up to 4â mV) between 0.05 and 0.5â Hz, meaning that cut-offs may not be used interchangeably. Saturation-induced signal loss was on average 10â s at 0.05â Hz and only 2â s with 0.5â Hz. When pacing was interrupted, the sensed COI amplitude varied (either higher or lower) by up to 4â mV, implying that it is advisable to periodically interrupt pacing to evaluate the sensed COI when reaching levels of â¼10â mV. Lead type did not impact COI amplitude. CONCLUSION: High-pass filters have a significant impact on electrogram characteristics at LBBAP implantation, with the 0.5â Hz settings having the most favourable profile.
Asunto(s)
Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anciano , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial/métodos , Electrodos Implantados , Técnicas Electrofisiológicas Cardíacas , Fascículo Atrioventricular/fisiopatología , Marcapaso Artificial , Diseño de Equipo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Potenciales de AcciónRESUMEN
Ventricular backup leads may be considered in selected patients with His bundle pacing (HBP), but it remains unknown to what extent this is useful. A total of 184 HBP patients were studied. At last follow-up, 147 (79.9%) patients retained His bundle capture at programmed output. His bundle pacing lead revision was performed in 5/36 (13.9%) patients without a backup lead and in 3/148 (2.0%) patients with a backup lead (P = 0.008). One patient without a backup lead had syncope due to atrial oversensing. Thus, implantation of ventricular backup leads may avoid lead revision and adverse events in selected HBP patients.
Asunto(s)
Fascículo Atrioventricular , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial , Marcapaso Artificial , Humanos , Fascículo Atrioventricular/fisiopatología , Masculino , Femenino , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial/métodos , Anciano , Resultado del Tratamiento , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Tiempo , Electrodos ImplantadosRESUMEN
In up to 30-40% of the cases acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is complicated by cardiac arrhythmias. The latter can be benign or malignant and mainly occur during the first 24 hours after myocardial infarction. Ischemia time being the key factor, arrythmias decreased dramatically since the implementation of accelerated reperfusion strategies. Bradyarrhythmias are often benign and self-limiting and are less frequent than tachyarrhythmias but can sometimes require specific treatment. The objective of this article is to provide an update on bradycardia and conduction system disorders occurring during ACS and their management.
Le syndrome coronarien aigu (SCA) est compliqué d'arythmies cardiaques jusque dans 30 à 40 % des cas. Celles-ci peuvent être bénignes ou malignes et surviennent principalement durant les premières 24 heures après l'infarctus du myocarde (IDM). Le temps d'ischémie étant le facteur clé, elles sont en baisse depuis la mise en place de stratégies de reperfusion accélérées. Les bradyarythmies, souvent bénignes et spontanément résolutives, sont moins fréquentes que les tachyarythmies mais peuvent parfois nécessiter une prise en charge spécifique. L'objectif de cet article est une mise à jour sur les bradycardies et troubles de la conduction survenant lors d'un SCA ainsi que leurs prises en charge.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo , Bradicardia , Humanos , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/complicaciones , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/terapia , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/diagnóstico , Bradicardia/diagnóstico , Bradicardia/etiología , Bradicardia/terapiaRESUMEN
AIMS: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is most often delivered using lumenless leads (LLLs), but may also be performed using stylet-driven leads (SDLs). There are limited reports on the comparison of these tools, mainly limited to reports describing initial operator experience or without detailed procedural data. Our aim was to perform an in-depth comparison of SDLs and LLLs for LBBAP at implantation and follow-up in a larger cohort of patients with experience that extends beyond that of the initial learning curve. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 306 consecutive patients (age 77 ± 11 years, 183 males) undergoing LBBAP implantation at a single centre were prospectively included. The population was split into two groups of 153 patients based on the initial use of an SDL (from 4 manufacturers) or an LLL. After having discounted the initial learning curve of 50 patients, there was no difference in the success rate between the initial use of lead type (96.0% with SDL vs. 94.3% with LLL, P = 0.56). There were no significant differences in success between lead models. Electrocardiogram and electrical parameters were comparable between the groups. Post-operative macro-dislodgement occurred in 4.3% of patients (essentially within the first day following implantation) and presumed micro-dislodgement with loss of conduction system capture or rise in threshold (occurring mostly during the first month) was observed in 4.7% of patients, without differences between groups. CONCLUSION: Left bundle branch area pacing may be safely and effectively performed using either LLLs or SDLs, which provides implanters with alternatives for delivering this therapy.
RESUMEN
It is well established that right ventricular pacing is detrimental in patients with reduced cardiac function who require ventricular pacing (VP), and alternatives nowadays are comprised of biventricular pacing (BiVP) and conduction system pacing (CSP). The latter modality is of particular interest in patients with a narrow baseline QRS as it completely avoids, or minimizes, ventricular desynchronization associated with VP. In this article, experts debate whether BiVP or CSP should be used to treat these patients.
Asunto(s)
Bloqueo Atrioventricular , Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca , Humanos , Bloqueo Atrioventricular/diagnóstico , Bloqueo Atrioventricular/terapia , Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca/efectos adversos , Volumen Sistólico , Trastorno del Sistema de Conducción Cardíaco , Sistema de Conducción CardíacoRESUMEN
With the increasing interest in conduction system pacing (CSP) over the last few years and the inclusion of this treatment modality in the current guidelines, our aim was to provide a snapshot of current practice across Europe. An online questionnaire was sent to physicians participating in the European Heart Rhythm Association research network as well as to national societies and over social media. Data on previous experience with CSP, current indications, preferred tools, unmet needs, and perceptions for the future are reported and discussed.
Asunto(s)
Fascículo Atrioventricular , Sistema de Conducción Cardíaco , Humanos , Trastorno del Sistema de Conducción Cardíaco , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Europa (Continente) , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial , ElectrocardiografíaRESUMEN
AIMS: Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (S-ICDs) are well established. However, inappropriate shocks (IAS) remain a source of concern since S-ICDs offer very limited troubleshooting options. In our multicentre case series, we describe several patients who experienced IAS due to a previously unknown S-ICD system issue. METHODS AND RESULTS: We observed six patients suffering from this novel IAS entity. The IAS occurred exclusively in primary or alternate S-ICD sensing vector configuration (therefore called 'Sense-B-noise'). IAS were caused by non-physiologic oversensing episodes characterized by intermittent signal saturation, diminished QRS amplitudes, and disappearance of the artefacts after the IAS. Noise/oversensing could not be provoked by manipulation, X-ray did not show evidence for lead/header issues and impedance measurements were within normal limits. The pooled experience of our centres implies that up to â¼5% of S-ICDs may be affected. The underlying root cause was discussed extensively with the manufacturer but remains unknown and is under further investigation. CONCLUSION: Sense-B-noise is a novel cause for IAS due to non-physiologic signal oversensing, arising from a previously unknown S-ICD system issue. Sense-B-noise may be suspected if episodes of signal saturation in primary or alternate vector configuration are present, oversensing cannot be provoked, and X-ray and electrical measurements appear normal. The issue can be resolved by reprogramming the device to secondary sensing vector.
Asunto(s)
Desfibriladores Implantables , Humanos , Desfibriladores Implantables/efectos adversosRESUMEN
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) was proposed in the 1990s as a new therapy for patients with heart failure and wide QRS with depressed left ventricular ejection fraction despite optimal medical treatment. This review is aimed first to describe the rationale and the physiologic effects of CRT. The journey of the landmark randomized trials leading to the adoption of CRT in the guidelines since 2005 is also reported showing the high level of evidence for CRT. Different alternative pacing modalities of CRT to conventional left ventricular pacing through the coronary sinus have been proposed to increase the response rate to CRT such as multisite pacing and endocardial pacing. A new emerging alternative technique to conventional biventricular pacing, conduction system pacing (CSP), is a promising therapy. The different modalities of CSP are described (Hirs pacing and left bundle branch area pacing). This new technique has to be evaluated in clinical randomized trials before implementation in the guidelines with a high level of evidence.
Asunto(s)
Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca , Humanos , Volumen Sistólico , Función Ventricular Izquierda , Trastorno del Sistema de Conducción Cardíaco , Sistema de Conducción CardíacoRESUMEN
This reviews the transition of remote monitoring of patients with cardiac electronic implantable devices from curiosity to standard of care. This has been delivered by technology evolution from patient-activated remote interrogations at appointed intervals to continuous monitoring that automatically flags clinically actionable information to the clinic for review. This model has facilitated follow-up and received professional society recommendations. Additionally, continuous monitoring has provided a new level of granularity of diagnostic data enabling extension of patient management from device to disease management. This ushers in an era of digital medicine with wider applications in cardiovascular medicine.
Asunto(s)
Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Humanos , Electrónica , Corazón , Tecnología , Manejo de la EnfermedadRESUMEN
AIMS: To assess the impact of MultiPoint™ Pacing (MPP) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) non-responders after 6 months of standard biventricular pacing (BiVP). METHODS AND RESULTS: The trial enrolled 5850 patients who planned to receive a CRT device. The echocardiography core laboratory assessed CRT response before implant and after 6 months of BiVP; non-response to BiVP was defined as <15% relative reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV). Echocardiographic non-responders were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive MPP (541 patients) or continued BiVP (570 patients) for an additional 6 months and evaluated the conversion rate to the echocardiographic response. The characteristics of both groups at randomization were comparable. The percentage of non-responder patients who became responders to CRT therapy was 29.4% in the MPP arm and 30.4% in the BIVP arm (P = 0.743). In patients with ≥30â mm spacing between the two left ventricular pacing sites (MPP-AS), identified during the first phase as a potential beneficial subgroup, no significant difference in the conversion rate was observed. CONCLUSION: Our trial shows that â¼30% of patients, who do not respond to CRT in the first 6 months, experience significant reverse remodelling in the following 6 months. This finding suggests that CRT benefit may be delayed or slowly incremental in a relevant proportion of patients and that the percentage of CRT responders may be higher than what has been described in short-/middle-term studies. MultiPoint™ Pacing does not improve CRT response in non-responders to BiVP, even with MPP-AS.
Asunto(s)
Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Humanos , Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca/efectos adversos , Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios Prospectivos , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/etiología , Dispositivos de Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca , Función Ventricular Izquierda/fisiologíaRESUMEN
Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as a more physiological alternative to right ventricular pacing and is also being used in selected cases for cardiac resynchronization therapy. His bundle pacing was first introduced over two decades ago and its use has risen over the last five years with the advent of tools which have facilitated implantation. Left bundle branch area pacing is more recent but its adoption is growing fast due to a wider target area and excellent electrical parameters. Nevertheless, as with any intervention, proper technique is a prerequisite for safe and effective delivery of therapy. This document aims to standardize the procedure and to provide a framework for physicians who wish to start CSP implantation, or who wish to improve their technique.
Asunto(s)
Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca , Sistema de Conducción Cardíaco , Humanos , América Latina , Canadá , Trastorno del Sistema de Conducción Cardíaco , Fascículo AtrioventricularRESUMEN
Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as a more physiological alternative to right ventricular pacing and is also being used in selected cases for cardiac resynchronization therapy. His bundle pacing was first introduced over two decades ago and its use has risen over the last years with the advent of tools which have facilitated implantation. Left bundle branch area pacing is more recent but its adoption is growing fast due to a wider target area and excellent electrical parameters. Nevertheless, as with any intervention, proper technique is a prerequisite for safe and effective delivery of therapy. This document aims to standardize the procedure and to provide a framework for physicians who wish to start CSP implantation, or who wish to improve their technique. A synopsis is provided in this print edition of EP-Europace. The full document may be consulted online, and a 'Key Messages' App can be downloaded from the EHRA website.
Asunto(s)
Sistema de Conducción Cardíaco , Humanos , Canadá , Trastorno del Sistema de Conducción Cardíaco , AsiaRESUMEN
AIMS: The field of conduction system pacing (CSP) is evolving, and our aim was to obtain a contemporary picture of European CSP practice. METHODS AND RESULTS: A survey was devised by a European CSP Expert Group and sent electronically to cardiologists utilizing CSP. A total of 284 physicians were invited to contribute of which 171 physicians (60.2%; 85% electrophysiologists) responded. Most (77%) had experience with both His-bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP). Pacing indications ranked highest for CSP were atrioventricular block (irrespective of left ventricular ejection fraction) and when coronary sinus lead implantation failed. For patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and heart failure (HF), conventional biventricular pacing remained first-line treatment. For most indications, operators preferred LBBAP over HBP as a first-line approach. When HBP was attempted as an initial approach, reasons reported for transitioning to utilizing LBBAP were: (i) high threshold (reported as >2â V at 1â ms), (ii) failure to reverse bundle branch block, or (iii) > 30â min attempting to implant at His-bundle sites. Backup right ventricular lead use for HBP was low (median 20%) and predominated in pace-and-ablate scenarios. Twelve-lead electrocardiogram assessment was deemed highly important during follow-up. This, coupled with limitations from current capture management algorithms, limits remote monitoring for CSP patients. CONCLUSIONS: This survey provides a snapshot of CSP implementation in Europe. Currently, CSP is predominantly used for bradycardia indications. For HF patients with LBBB, most operators reserve CSP for biventricular implant failures. Left bundle branch area pacing ostensibly has practical advantages over HBP and is therefore preferred by many operators. Practical limitations remain, and large randomized clinical trial data are currently lacking.
Asunto(s)
Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Humanos , Volumen Sistólico/fisiología , Función Ventricular Izquierda , Resultado del Tratamiento , Sistema de Conducción Cardíaco , Bloqueo de Rama/diagnóstico , Bloqueo de Rama/terapia , Arritmias Cardíacas/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapiaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Novel pacing technologies, such as His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP), have emerged to maintain physiological ventricular activation. We investigated the outcomes of LBBP with HBP for patients requiring a de novo permanent pacing. METHODS AND RESULTS: Systematic review of randomized clinical trials and observational studies comparing LBBaP with HBP until March 01, 2023 was performed. Random and fixed effects meta-analyses of the effect of pacing technology on outcomes were performed. Study outcomes included pacing metrics, QRS duration, lead revision, procedure parameters, all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalization (HFH). Overall, 10 studies with 1596 patients were included. Implant success rate was higher in LBBaP compared with HBP (RR 1.24, 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.42, p = .002). LBBaP was associated with lower capture threshold at implantation (mean difference (MD) -0.62 V, 95% CI: -0.74 to -0.51 V, p < .0001) and at follow-up (MD -0.74 V, 95% CI: -0.96 to -0.53, p < .0001), shorter procedure duration (MD -14.66 min, 95% CI: -23.54 to -5.78, p = .001) and shorter fluoroscopy time (MD -4.2 min, 95% CI: -8.4 to -0.0, p = .05). Compared with HBP, LBBaP was associated with a decreased risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.77, p = .002) and HFH (RR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.33 to 1.00, p = .05). No statistical differences were found in lead revisions and QRS duration before and after pacing. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis found that LBBaP was superior to HBP regarding pacing metrics and implant success rate as an initial pacing strategy, although absence of head-to-head randomized comparison warrants caution in interpretation of the results.
Asunto(s)
Fascículo Atrioventricular , Tabique Interventricular , Humanos , Ventrículos Cardíacos , Reoperación , Fluoroscopía , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial , Electrocardiografía , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
With the advent of conduction system pacing, the threshold for performing 'ablate and pace' procedures for atrial fibrillation has gone down markedly in many centres due to the ability to provide a simple and physiological means of pacing the ventricles. This article reviews the technical considerations for this strategy as well as the current evidence, recognized indications, and future perspectives.
RESUMEN
Pacing from the right ventricle is associated with an increased risk of development of congestive heart failure, increases in total and cardiac mortality, and a worsened quality of life. Conduction system pacing has become increasingly realized as an alternative to right ventricular apical pacing. Conduction system pacing from the His bundle and left bundle branch area has been shown to provide physiologic activation of the ventricle and may be an alternative to coronary sinus pacing. Conduction system pacing has been studied as an alternative for both bradycardia pacing and for heart failure pacing. In this review, we summarize the clinical results of conduction system pacing under a variety of different clinical settings. The anatomic targets of conduction system pacing are illustrated, and electrocardiographic correlates of pacing from different sites in the conduction system are defined. Ultimately, clinical trials comparing conduction system pacing with standard right ventricular apical pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy pacing will help define its benefit and risks compared with existing techniques.
RESUMEN
AIMS: Permanent transseptal left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a promising new pacing method for both bradyarrhythmia and heart failure indications. However, data regarding safety, feasibility and capture type are limited to relatively small, usually single centre studies. In this large multicentre international collaboration, outcomes of LBBAP were evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a registry-based observational study that included patients in whom LBBAP device implantation was attempted at 14 European centres, for any indication. The study comprised 2533 patients (mean age 73.9 years, female 57.6%, heart failure 27.5%). LBBAP lead implantation success rate for bradyarrhythmia and heart failure indications was 92.4% and 82.2%, respectively. The learning curve was steepest for the initial 110 cases and plateaued after 250 cases. Independent predictors of LBBAP lead implantation failure were heart failure, broad baseline QRS and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter. The predominant LBBAP capture type was left bundle fascicular capture (69.5%), followed by left ventricular septal capture (21.5%) and proximal left bundle branch capture (9%). Capture threshold (0.77â V) and sensing (10.6â mV) were stable during mean follow-up of 6.4 months. The complication rate was 11.7%. Complications specific to the ventricular transseptal route of the pacing lead occurred in 209 patients (8.3%). CONCLUSIONS: LBBAP is feasible as a primary pacing technique for both bradyarrhythmia and heart failure indications. Success rate in heart failure patients and safety need to be improved. For wider use of LBBAP, randomized trials are necessary to assess clinical outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Fascículo Atrioventricular , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Humanos , Femenino , Anciano , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial/efectos adversos , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial/métodos , Bloqueo de Rama/terapia , Bloqueo de Rama/etiología , Bradicardia/terapia , Bradicardia/etiología , Electrocardiografía/métodos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
In contrast to left bundle branch pacing, the criteria for left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) were never validated. LVSP is usually defined as deep septal deployment of the pacing lead with a pseudo-right bundle branch morphology in V1. The case report describes an implant procedure during which this definition of LVSP was fulfilled in four of five pacing locations within the septum, with the shallowest of them present in less than 50% of the septal thickness. The case highlights the need for a more precise definition of LVSP.