Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol ; 12(2): e006878, 2019 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30707036

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The 12-lead ECG is considered the gold standard to differentiate between selective (S), nonselective (NS) His bundle pacing (HBP), and right ventricular septal capture in routine clinical practice. We sought to assess the utility of device EGM recordings as a tool to identify the type of HBP morphology. METHODS: One hundred forty-eight consecutive patients underwent HBP with a 3830 Select Secure lead (Medtronic, Inc) at 3 centers between October 2016 and October 2017. The near field V-EGM morphology (NF EGM), near field V-EGM time to peak (NFTime to peak), and far-field EGM QRS duration (QRSd) were recorded while pacing the His lead with simultaneous 12-lead ECG rhythm strips. RESULTS: Indications for HBP were sinus node dysfunction, atrioventricular conduction disease, and cardiac resynchronization therapy in 68 (46%), 56 (38%), and 24 (16%) patients, respectively. Baseline QRSd was 108±38 ms with QRSd >120 ms in 57 (39%) patients (27 right bundle branch block, 18 left bundle branch block, and 12 intraventricular conduction delay). S-HBP was noted in 54 (36%) patients. A positive NFEGM and NFTime to peak >40 ms were highly sensitive (94% and 93%, respectively) and specific (90% and 94%) for S-HBP irrespective of baseline QRSd. All 3 parameters (+NFEGM, NFTime to peak >40 ms, and far-field EGM QRSd <120 ms) had high negative predictive value (97%, 95%, and 92%). A novel device-based algorithm for S-HBP was proposed. EGM transitions correlated with ECG transitions during threshold testing and can help accurately differentiate between S-HBP, NS-HBP, and right ventricular septal pacing with a cumulative positive predictive value of 91% (positive predictive value =100% in patients with baseline QRSd <120 ms). CONCLUSIONS: We propose a novel and simple criteria for accurate differentiation between S-HBP, NS-HBP, and right ventricular septal capture morphologies by careful analysis of device EGMs alone. This study paves the way for future studies to assess autocapture algorithms for devices with HBP.


Asunto(s)
Potenciales de Acción , Arritmias Cardíacas/terapia , Fascículo Atrioventricular/fisiopatología , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial/métodos , Técnicas Electrofisiológicas Cardíacas , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Algoritmos , Arritmias Cardíacas/diagnóstico , Arritmias Cardíacas/fisiopatología , Electrocardiografía , Femenino , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Frecuencia Cardíaca , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Estudios Prospectivos , Procesamiento de Señales Asistido por Computador , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos , Función Ventricular Derecha
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA