RESUMEN
AIMS: The pathophysiological effects of chronic right ventricular pacing and the role of right ventricular lead position are not well understood. Therefore, we investigated the association between left ventricular contractile dyssynchrony and pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) in patients with chronic right ventricular pacing. Furthermore, we assessed the association between right ventricular lead location and left ventricular contractile dyssynchrony. METHODS: This was a retrospective study using data from 153 pacemaker patients with normal (≥ 50%) pre-implant left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Baseline and follow-up echocardiograms were analyzed, and PICM was defined as LVEF < 50% with ≥ 10% decrease in LVEF after pacemaker implantation. Relative index of contractile asymmetry (rICA), a novel strain rate-based method, was calculated to quantify left ventricular contractile dyssynchrony between opposing walls in the three apical views. Right ventricular lead position was categorized into anterior septum, posterior septum, free wall, and apex based on contrast-enhanced cardiac computed tomography. RESULTS: Forty-seven (31%) developed PICM. Overall contractile dyssynchrony, measured by mean rICA, was higher in the PICM group compared with the non-PICM group (1.19 ± 0.21 vs. 1.03 ± 0.19, p < 0.001). Left ventricular anterior-inferior dyssynchrony, assessed in the apical two-chamber view, was independently associated with PICM (p < 0.001). Thirty-seven (24%) leads were implanted anterior septal, 11 (7.2%) posterior septal, 74 (48.4%) apical, and 31 (20.3%) free wall. Left ventricular anterior-inferior dyssynchrony was significantly different between the four pacing lead locations (p < 0.01) with the highest rICA observed in the posterior septal group (1.30 ± 0.37). CONCLUSIONS: PICM is significantly associated increased contractile dyssynchrony assessed by rICA. This study suggests that especially left ventricular dyssynchrony in the anterior-inferior direction is associated with PICM, and pacing the right ventricular posterior septum resulted in the highest degree of anterior-inferior dyssynchrony. Quantification of left ventricular dyssynchrony by rICA provides important insights to the potential pathophysiology of PICM and the impact of right ventricular lead position.
Asunto(s)
Cardiomiopatías , Marcapaso Artificial , Disfunción Ventricular Izquierda , Humanos , Función Ventricular Izquierda/fisiología , Volumen Sistólico , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Aim: Current non-invasive electrocardiographic imaging (ECGi) methods are often based on complex body surface potential mapping, limiting the clinical applicability. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the ability of a novel non-invasive ECGi method, based on the standard 12-lead ECG, to localize initial site of ventricular activation in right ventricular (RV) paced patients. Validation of the method was performed by comparing the ECGi reconstructed earliest site of activation against the true RV pacing site determined from cardiac computed tomography (CT). Methods: This was a retrospective study using data from 34 patients, previously implanted with a dual chamber pacemaker due to advanced atrioventricular block. True RV lead position was determined from analysis of a post-implant cardiac CT scan. The ECGi method was based on an inverse-ECG algorithm applying electrophysiological rules. The algorithm integrated information from an RV paced 12-lead ECG together with a CT-derived patient-specific heart-thorax geometric model to reconstruct a 3D electrical ventricular activation map. Results: The mean geodesic localization error (LE) between the ECGi reconstructed initial site of activation and the RV lead insertion site determined from CT was 13.9 ± 5.6 mm. The mean RV endocardial surface area was 146.0 ± 30.0 cm2 and the mean circular LE area was 7.0 ± 5.2 cm2 resulting in a relative LE of 5.0 ± 4.0%. Conclusion: We demonstrated a novel non-invasive ECGi method, based on the 12-lead ECG, that accurately localized the RV pacing site in relation to the ventricular anatomy.
RESUMEN
Prospective studies applying fluoroscopy for assessment of right ventricular (RV) lead position have failed to show clear benefits from RV septal pacing. We investigated the impact of different RV lead positions verified by computed tomography (CT) on the risk of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM). We retrospectively included 153 patients who underwent routine fluoroscopy-guided pacemaker implantation between March 2012 and May 2020. All patients had normal pre-implant left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Patients attended a follow-up visit including contrast-enhanced cardiac CT and transthoracic echocardiography. Patients were classified as septal or non-septal based on CT analysis. The primary endpoint was PICM (LVEF < 50% with ≥10% decrease after implantation). Based on CT, 48 (31.4%) leads were septal and 105 (68.6%) were non-septal. Over a median follow-up of 3.1 years, 16 patients (33.3%) in the septal group developed PICM compared to 31 (29.5%) in the non-septal group (p = 0.6). Overall, 13.1% deteriorated to LVEF ≤ 40%, 5.9% were upgraded to cardiac resynchronization therapy device, and 14.4% developed new-onset atrial fibrillation, with no significant differences between the groups. This study demonstrated a high risk of PICM despite normal pre-implant left ventricular systolic function with no significant difference between CT-verified RV septal or non-septal lead position.
RESUMEN
Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a treatment for patients with heart failure and electrical dyssynchrony, i.e., left bundle branch block (LBBB) ECG pattern. CRT resynchronizes ventricular contraction with a right ventricle (RV) and a left ventricle (LV) pacemaker lead. Positioning the LV lead in the latest electrically activated region (measured from Q wave onset in the ECG to LV sensing by the left pacemaker electrode [QLV]) is associated with favorable outcome. However, optimal LV lead placement is limited by coronary venous anatomy and the inability to measure QLV non-invasively before implantation. We propose a novel non-invasive method for estimating QLV in sinus-rhythm from the standard 12-lead ECG. Methods: We obtained 12-lead ECG, LV electrograms and LV lead position in a standard LV 17-segment model from procedural recordings from 135 standard CRT recipients. QLV duration was measured post-operatively. Using a generic heart geometry and corresponding forward model for ECG computation, the electrical activation pattern of the heart was fitted to best match the 12-lead ECG in an iterative optimization procedure. This procedure initialized six activation sites associated with the His-Purkinje system. The initial timing of each site was based on the directions of the vectorcardiogram (VCG). Timing and position of the sites were then changed iteratively to improve the match between simulated and measured ECG. Noninvasive estimation of QLV was done by calculating the time difference between Q-onset on the computed ECG and the activation time corresponding to centroidal epicardial activation time of the segment where the LV electrode is positioned. The estimated QLV was compared to the measured QLV. Further, the distance between the actual LV position and the estimated LV position was computed from the generic ventricular model. Results: On average there was no difference between QLV measured from procedural recordings and non-invasive estimation of QLV ( Δ Q L V = - 3.0 ± 22.5 m s , p = 0.12 ). Median distance between actual LV pacing site and the estimated pacing site was 18.6 mm (IQR 17.3 mm). Conclusion: Using the standard 12-lead ECG and a generic heart model it is possible to accurately estimate QLV. This method may potentially be used to support patient selection, optimize implant procedures, and to simulate optimal stimulation parameters prior to pacemaker implantation.
RESUMEN
AIMS: The objective of the current study is to investigate the risk of heart failure (HF) after implantation of a pacemaker (PM) with a right ventricular pacing (RVP) lead in comparison to a matched cohort without a PM and factors associated with this risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients without a known history of HF who had a PM implanted with an RVP lead between 2000 and 2014 (n = 27 704) were identified using Danish nationwide registries. An age- and gender-matched control cohort (matched 1:5, n = 138 520) without PM and HF was identified to compare the risk. Outcome was the cumulative incidence of HF including fatal HF within the first 2 years of PM implantation, with all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction (MI) as competing risks. Due to violation of proportional hazards, the follow-up period was divided into three time-intervals: <30 days, 30-180 days, and >180 days-2 years. The cumulative incidence of HF including fatal HF was observed in 2937 (10.6%) PM patients. Risks for the three time-intervals were <30 days [hazard ratio (HR) 5.98, 95% CI 5.19-6.90], 30-180 days (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.71-1.98), and >180 days (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.04-1.17). Among patients with a PM device, factors associated with increased risk of HF were male sex (HR 1.33, 95% CI 1.24-1.43), presence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.29-2.09), and prior MI (1.77, 95% 1.50-2.09). CONCLUSIONS: Pacemaker with an RVP lead is strongly associated with risk of HF specifically within the first 6 months. Patients with antecedent history of MI and CKD had substantially increased risk.