RESUMEN
Introduction: Conduction system pacing (CSP), consisting of His bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a rapidly developing field. These pacing techniques result in single lead left ventricular resynchronisation. Understanding of the associated learning curve of the two techniques is an important consideration for new implanters/implanting centres. Methods: We conducted a review of the first 30 cases of both HBP and LBBAP at The Royal Brompton Hospital. The procedural duration and fluoroscopy time were used as surrogates for the learning curve of each technique. Results: Patient characteristics were similar in HBP and LBBAP groups; LV ejection fraction (46% vs 54%, p = 0.08), pre-procedural QRS duration (119 ms vs 128 ms, p = 0.32).Mean procedural duration was shorter for LBBAP than for HBP (87 vs 107mins, p = 0.04) and the drop in procedural duration was more marked in LBBAP, plateauing and remaining low at 80mins after the initial 10 cases. Fluoroscopic screening time mirrored procedural duration (8 min vs 16 min, p < 0.01). Discussion/Conclusion: Our data suggest that the CSP learning curve was shorter for LBBAP than for HBP and appears to plateaux after the first 10 cases, however the HBP learning curve is longer with continued improvement over the first 30 cases. The shorter learning curve of LBBAP in conjunction with the superior electrical parameters and simplified programming mean the establishment of a CSP program is potentially easier with LBBAP compared to with HBP.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: In the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, nine out of 129 patients (7%) developed life-threatening bradycardia episodes ultimately requiring a TPPM, whilst being supported with VV-ECMO for severe COVID-19 ARDS in our tertiary cardio-pulmonary failure center. ANALYSIS: All subjects had asystole due to sinus node dysfunction and experienced at least one episode involving cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Most bradycardic events were seen in the context of vagal hypersensitivity. Mean time from general ICU admission to TPPM insertion was 20.6 ± 8.9 days. One patient developed a large chest wall hematoma weeks after TPPM implantation, no other TPPM-related issues were observed. No patient required a long-term pacing system. Six-months survival rate was high (89%). CONCLUSION: These findings suggested that transient life-threatening sinus node disease is not uncommon in ECMO-dependent COVID-19 ARDS patients. TPPM with an active fixation lead is sometimes needed to facilitate ongoing ICU care, however, long-term permanent pacing was not required.
