Interaction of left ventricular size with the outcome of cardiac resynchronization therapy in Japanese patients.

BACKGROUND: We analyzed the influence of the QRS duration (QRSd) to LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) ratio on cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) outcomes in heart failure patients classified as III/IV per the New York Heart Association (NYHA) and with small body size. HYPOTHESIS: We proposed the hypothesis that the QRSd/LV size ratio is a better index of the CRT substrate. METHODS: We enrolled 114 patients with advanced heart failure (NYHA class III/IV, and LV ejection fraction >35%) who received a CRT device, including those with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and QRSd ≥120 milliseconds (n = 60), non-LBBB and QRSd ≥150 milliseconds (n = 30) and non-LBBB and QRSd of 120-149 milliseconds (n = 24). RESULTS: Over a mean follow-up period of 65 ± 58 months, the incidence of the primary endpoint, a composite of all-cause death and hospitalization for heart failure, showed no significant intergroup difference (43.3% vs. 50.0% vs. 37.5%, respectively, p = .72). Similarly, among 104 patients with QRSd/LVEDV ≥ 0.67 (n = 54) and QRSd/LVEDV < 0.67 (n = 52), no significant differences were observed in the incidence of the primary endpoint (35.1% vs. 51.9%, p = .49). Nevertheless, patients with QRSd/LVEDV ≥ 0.67 showed better survival than those with QRSd/LVEDV < 0.67 (14.8% vs. 34.6%, p = .0024). CONCLUSION: Advanced HF patients with a higher QRSd/LVEDV ratio showed better survival in this small-body-size population. Thus, the risk is concentrated among those with a larger QRSd, and patients with a relatively smaller left ventricular size appeared to benefit from CRT.

An interesting electrocardiogram caused by lead reversal.

BACKGROUND: During normal sinus rhythm, atrial depolarization is conducted from right atrium to left atrium through Bachmann's bundle, and a normal P wave axis which is measured on the frontal plane is between 0º and + 75º. The change of P wave polarity is helpful for the analysis of origin point. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a patient with negative P wave in lead I. The characteristics of QRS complex in leads V1 to V6 are helpful to preliminarily differential diagnosis. The 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) with correct limb leads (right arm-left arm) placement shows sinus rhythm with complete right bundle branch block (RBBB). CONCLUSIONS: The change of P wave polarity as well as characteristics of QRS complex can help identify limb-lead reversals.

Discrimination between ventricular tachycardia and wide-QRS preexcited tachycardia.

BACKGROUND: To develop a new algorithm to differentiate ventricular tachycardia (VT) from preexcited tachycardia (pre-ET) according to left bundle branch block (LBBB) and right bundle branch block (RBBB) patterns. METHODS: This study included 67 electrocardiograms (ECGs) with VT and 63 ECGs with pre-ET, collected from our hospital and through PubMed. Of those, 64 were allocated to the derivation cohort and the rest to the validation cohort. The diagnoses of the ECGs were confirmed using an electrophysiological study. Parameters and classifiers from prior algorithms along with the propagation speeds in the early portion of the QRS complex (initial deflection index) in leads V1, V6, aVR, II, and III were manually measured. The performance of the new algorithm was compared with that of prior algorithms. RESULTS: The initial deflection index in lead III was the strongest predictor of pre-ET in LBBB-pattern wide-QRS tachycardia (p = 0.003, AUC 0.805). The initial deflection index in lead V1 was the most powerful predictor of pre-ET in RBBB-pattern wide-QRS tachycardia (p = 0.001, AUC 0.848). Compared to earlier algorithms, those using the initial deflection indexes: lead III in LBBB patterns (cutoff value >0.3) and lead V1 in RBBB patterns (cutoff value ≤0.48), demonstrated superior performance in screening VT, with AUC values of 0.828. The initial deflection indexes proved effective as discriminators between VT and pre-ET in the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In LBBB-pattern wide-QRS tachycardia, the early propagation speed of pre-ET was faster than that in VT. Conversely, in RBBB-pattern wide-QRS tachycardia, it was slower.

Paced QRS morphology mimicking complete left bundle branch block induced by right ventricular pacing is associated with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy.

INTRODUCTION: Right ventricular (RV) pacing sometimes causes left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction, also known as pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM). However, the association between specifically paced QRS morphology and PICM development has not been elucidated. This study aimed to investigate the association between paced QRS mimicking a complete left bundle branch block (CLBBB) and PICM development. METHODS: We retrospectively screened 2009 patients who underwent pacemaker implantation from 2010 to 2020 in seven institutions. Patients who received pacemakers for an advanced atrioventricular block or bradycardia with atrial fibrillation, baseline LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 50%, and echocardiogram recorded at least 6 months postimplantation were included. The paced QRS recorded immediately after implantation was analyzed. A CLBBB-like paced QRS was defined as meeting the CLBBB criteria of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Foundation/Heart Rhythm Society in 2009. PICM was defined as a ≥10% LVEF decrease, resulting in an LVEF of <50%. RESULTS: Among the 270 patients analyzed, PICM was observed in 38. Baseline LVEF was lower in patients with PICM, and CLBBB-like paced QRS was frequently observed in PICM. Multivariate analysis revealed that low baseline LVEF (odds ratio [OR]: 0.93 per 1% increase, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89-0.98, p = 0.006) and CLBBB-like paced QRS (OR: 2.69, 95% CI: 1.25-5.76, p = 0.011) were significantly associated with PICM development. CONCLUSION: CLBBB-like paced QRS may be a novel risk factor for PICM. RV pacing, which causes CLBBB-like QRS morphology, may need to be avoided, and patients with CLBBB-like paced QRS should be followed-up carefully.

Ultra-high-frequency ECG volumetric and negative derivative epicardial ventricular electrical activation pattern.

From precordial ECG leads, the conventional determination of the negative derivative of the QRS complex (ND-ECG) assesses epicardial activation. Recently we showed that ultra-high-frequency electrocardiography (UHF-ECG) determines the activation of a larger volume of the ventricular wall. We aimed to combine these two methods to investigate the potential of volumetric and epicardial ventricular activation assessment and thereby determine the transmural activation sequence. We retrospectively analyzed 390 ECG records divided into three groups-healthy subjects with normal ECG, left bundle branch block (LBBB), and right bundle branch block (RBBB) patients. Then we created UHF-ECG and ND-ECG-derived depolarization maps and computed interventricular electrical dyssynchrony. Characteristic spatio-temporal differences were found between the volumetric UHF-ECG activation patterns and epicardial ND-ECG in the Normal, LBBB, and RBBB groups, despite the overall high correlations between both methods. Interventricular electrical dyssynchrony values assessed by the ND-ECG were consistently larger than values computed by the UHF-ECG method. Noninvasively obtained UHF-ECG and ND-ECG analyses describe different ventricular dyssynchrony and the general course of ventricular depolarization. Combining both methods based on standard 12-lead ECG electrode positions allows for a more detailed analysis of volumetric and epicardial ventricular electrical activation, including the assessment of the depolarization wave direction propagation in ventricles.

Centennial of the original description of Mobitz type II second-degree atrioventricular block.

The year 2024 marks the centenary of Mobitz's description of type II second-degree atrioventricular block. Its definition remains valid to this day with only minor modification for the diagnosis of infranodal conduction block. Mobitz a century ago indicated that his type II atrioventricular block was associated with Stock-Adams attacks and a prolonged duration of the QRS complex before the eventual description of bundle branch block.

Comprehensive analysis of right fascicular and right bundle branch blocks: A multi-center study.

Electrocardiographic patterns of right bundle branch and fascicular blocks were comprehensively analyzed in a two-phase study. The research aimed to address the scarcity of literature and the absence of standardized diagnostic criteria for these conditions. It revealed a weak correlation between the cardiac axis and age and highlighted the high misdiagnosis rate of these blocks. Furthermore, it discussed the challenges in fulfilling existing diagnostic criteria. The study emphasizes the need for a more precise understanding of right ventricular conduction disorders and the importance of developing robust diagnostic criteria.

Incidence and Outcomes of New-Onset Right Bundle Branch Block Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: The incidence and prognosis of right bundle branch block (RBBB) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are unknown. Hence, we sought to characterize the incidence of post-TAVR RBBB and determine associated risks of permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation and mortality. METHODS: All patients 18 years and above without preexisting RBBB or PPM who underwent TAVR at US Mayo Clinic sites and Mayo Clinic Health Systems from June 2010 to May 2021 were evaluated. Post-TAVR RBBB was defined as new-onset RBBB in the postimplantation period. The risks of PPM implantation (within 90 days) and mortality following TAVR were compared for patients with and without post-TAVR RBBB using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards modeling. The risks of PPM implantation (within 90 days) and mortality following TAVR were compared for patients with and without post-TAVR RBBB using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: Of 1992 patients, 15 (0.75%) experienced new RBBB post-TAVR. There was a higher degree of valve oversizing among patients with new RBBB post-TAVR versus those without (17.9% versus 10.0%; P=0.034). Ten patients (66.7%) with post-TAVR RBBB experienced high-grade atrioventricular block and underwent PPM implantation (median 1 day; Q1, 0.2 and Q3, 4), compared with 268/1977 (13.6%) without RBBB. Following propensity score adjustment for covariates (age, sex, balloon-expandable valve, annulus diameter, and valve oversizing), post-TAVR RBBB was significantly associated with PPM implantation (hazard ratio, 8.36 [95% CI, 4.19-16.7]; P<0.001). No statistically significant increase in mortality was seen with post-TAVR RBBB (hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.33-2.11]; P=0.69), adjusting for age and sex. CONCLUSIONS: Although infrequent, post-TAVR RBBB was associated with elevated PPM implantation risk. The mechanisms for its development and its clinical prognosis require further study.

Association between left bundle branch block and ventricular septal mid-wall fibrosis in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: The left bundle branch block (LBBB) is associated with ventricular septal mid-wall fibrosis (SMF) in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). However, whether LBBB is also associated with SMF in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains unclear. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 210 patients with preserved LVEF (male, n = 116; female, n = 94; mean age, 44 ± 17 years). LBBB was defined as QRS duration ≥140 ms for men or ≥ 130 ms for women, QS or rS in V1-V2, mid-QRS notching or slurring in at least two leads (V1, V2, V5, V6, I, and aVL). SMF determined by late gadolinium-enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance was defined as stripe-like or patchy mid-myocardial hyper-enhancement in the interventricular septal segments. RESULTS: SMF was detected in 24.8% (52/210) of these patients. The proportion of patients with SMF with LBBB was higher than the proportion of patients with SMF without LBBB (58.3% vs. 20.4%; P < 0.001). In the forward multivariate logistic analysis, LBBB (OR, 4.399; 95% CI, 1.774-10.904; P = 0.001) and age (OR, 1.028; 95% CI, 1.006-1.051; P = 0.011) were independently associated with SMF. The presence of LBBB showed a sensitivity of 27%%, specificity of 94%, positive predictive value of 58%%, and negative predictive value of 80% for the detection of SMF. CONCLUSION: LBBB was significantly associated with SMF in hospitalized patients with preserved LVEF. Screening with a resting 12­lead ECG may help to identify patients who are at a high risk of the presence of SMF.

Predictors for new-onset conduction block in patients with pure native aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement with a new-generation self-expanding valve (VitaFlow Liberty™): a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: New-generation self-expanding valves can improve the success rate of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for severe pure native aortic regurgitation (PNAR). However, predictors of new-onset conduction block post-TAVR using new-generation self-expanding valves in patients with PNAR remain to be established. Therefore, this study aimed to identify predictors of new-onset conduction block post-TAVR using new-generation self-expanding valves (VitaFlow Liberty™) in patients with PNAR. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients were categorized into pacemaker and non-pacemaker groups based on their need for new postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI). Based on the postoperative presence of either new-onset complete left bundle branch block (cLBBB) or high-grade atrioventricular block (AVB), patients were further classified into conduction disorder and non-conduction disorder groups. Laboratory, echocardiographic, computed tomography, preoperative and postoperative electrocardiography, and procedural and clinical data were collected immediately after TAVR and during hospitalization and compared between the groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed incorporating the significant variables from the univariate analyses. RESULTS: This study examined 68 consecutive patients with severe PNAR who underwent TAVR. In 20 patients, a permanent pacemaker was fitted postoperatively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed an association between the need for postoperative PPI and preoperative complete right bundle branch block (cRBBB) or first-degree AVB, as well as a non-tubular left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT). In addition, valve implantation depth and angle of aortic root were independent predictors of new-onset cLBBB or high-grade AVB developing post-TAVR. The predictive value of valve implantation depth and angle of aortic root was further supported by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis results. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PNAR undergoing TAVR using self-expanding valves, preoperative cRBBB or first-degree AVB and a non-tubular LVOT were indicators of a higher likelihood of PPI requirement. Moreover, deeper valve implantation depth and greater angle of aortic root may be independent risk factors for new-onset cLBBB or high-grade AVB post-TAVR. Valve implantation depth and angle of aortic root values may be used to predict the possibility of new cLBBB or high-grade AVB post-TAVR.

Post-TAVR conduction abnormalities leading to permanent pacemaker implantation: Risk factors, prevention, and management.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) often leads to conduction abnormalities, necessitating pacemaker implantation. This review of 38 meta-analyses identified preexisting right bundle branch block (RBBB), LAHB, and new-onset left bundle branch block as key risk factors, with a higher PPM risk in male and older patients. Procedural factors like transfemoral access and self-expandable valves also increase this risk. Prevention focuses on tailoring TAVR to individual electrophysiological and anatomical profiles. However, there's a lack of consensus in managing these conduction disturbances post-TAVR, highlighting the need for further research and standardized treatment strategies.

Electrocardiographic predictors of left ventricular scar in athletes with right bundle branch block premature ventricular beats.

AIMS: Right bundle branch block (RBBB) morphology non-sustained ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) have been associated with the presence of non-ischaemic left ventricular scar (NLVS) in athletes. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to identify clinical and electrocardiogram (ECG) predictors of the presence of NLVS in athletes with RBBB VAs. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty-four athletes [median age 39 (24-53) years, 79% males] with non-sustained RBBB VAs underwent cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) with late gadolinium enhancement in order to exclude the presence of a concealed structural heart disease. Thirty-six athletes (56%) showed NLVS at CMR and were assigned to the NLVS positive group, whereas 28 athletes (44%) to the NLVS negative group. Family history of cardiomyopathy and seven different ECG variables were statistically more prevalent in the NLVS positive group. At univariate analysis, seven ECG variables (low QRS voltages in limb leads, negative T waves in inferior leads, negative T waves in limb leads I-aVL, negative T waves in precordial leads V4-V6, presence of left posterior fascicular block, presence of pathologic Q waves, and poor R-wave progression in right precordial leads) proved to be statistically associated with the finding of NLVS; these were grouped together in a score. A score ≥2 was proved to be the optimal cut-off point, identifying NLVS athletes in 92% of cases and showing the best accuracy (86% sensitivity and 100% specificity, respectively). However, a cut-off ≥1 correctly identified all patients with NLVS (absence of false negatives). CONCLUSION: In athletes with RBBB morphology non-sustained VAs, specific ECG abnormalities at 12-lead ECG can help in detecting subjects with NLVS at CMR.

In athletes with right bundle branch block (RBBB) morphology non-sustained ventricular arrhythmias (VAs), the presence of a non-ischaemic left ventricular scar (NLVS) may be highly suspected if one or more of the following electrocardiogram (ECG) characteristics are present at the 12-lead resting ECG: low QRS voltages in limb leads, negative T waves in inferior leads, negative T waves in limb leads I­aVL, negative T waves in precordial leads V4­V6, presence of left posterior fascicular block, presence of pathologic Q waves, and poor R-wave progression in right precordial leads. This score should be externally validated in a larger population of athletes with VAs. In athletes with RBBB morphology non-sustained Vas, attention should be placed on the 12-lead resting ECG to suspect the presence of an NLVS. In athletes with RBBB VAs and the presence of one or more of the identified ECG characteristics, a cardiac magnetic resonance with late gadolinium enhancement is useful to rule out an NLVS.

Diagnostic Dilemma of Syncope: Esophageal Hiatal Hernia and High-risk Bundle-branch Block.

We herein report a complicated case of recurrent syncope accompanying bundle branch block and hiatal hernia of the esophagus. An 83-year-old woman presented with syncope. Echocardiography visualized the left atrium compressed by an esophageal hiatal hernia, which had potential to decrease the cardiac output. Although she underwent esophageal repair surgery, two months after the surgery, she presented to the emergency department again with complaints of syncope. At the return visit, her face was pale and her pulse rate was 30 beats per minute. Electrocardiography showed complete atrioventricular block. On reviewing the patient's previous electrocardiography findings, we found a record of trifascicular block. This case illustrates the importance of predicting atrioventricular blocks in patients with high-risk bundle-branch blocks. Keeping in mind high-risk bundle-branch blocks will help clinicians avoid anchoring bias due to a striking image masquerading as the true diagnosis.

Association Between Left Ventricular Apical-to-Basal Strain Ratio and Conduction Disorders after Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to evaluate whether left ventricular apical-to-basal longitudinal strain differences, representing advanced basal interstitial fibrosis, are associated with conduction disorders after aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis. METHODS: Patients with aortic stenosis undergoing AVR were included. The apical-to-basal strain ratio was calculated by dividing the average strain of the apical segments by the average strain of the basal segments. Values >1.9 were considered abnormal, as previously described. All patients were followed up for the occurrence of complete left or right bundle branch block or permanent pacemaker implantation within 2 years after AVR. Subgroup analysis was performed in patients undergoing transcatheter AVR. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-four patients were included (median age of 74 years [interquartile range, 65, 80], 46.4% male). During a median follow-up of 12.2 months (interquartile range, 0.2, 24.3), 74 patients (27%) developed complete bundle branch block or were implanted with a permanent pacemaker. These patients more often had an abnormal apical-to-basal strain ratio. Cumulative event-free survival analysis showed worse outcome in patients with an abnormal apical-to-basal strain ratio (log rank χ2 = 7.258, P = .007). In multivariable Cox regression analysis, an abnormal apical-to-basal strain ratio was the only independent factor associated with the occurrence of complete bundle branch block or permanent pacemaker implantation after adjusting for other factors previously shown to be associated with conduction disorders after AVR. Subgroup analysis confirmed the independent association of an abnormal apical-to-basal strain ratio with conduction disorders after transcatheter AVR. CONCLUSION: The apical-to-basal strain ratio is independently associated with conduction disorders after AVR and could guide risk stratification in patients potentially at risk for pacemaker implantation.

Left bundle branch pacing versus left ventricular septal pacing as a primary procedural endpoint during left bundle branch area pacing: Evaluation of two different implant strategies.

INTRODUCTION: Implant procedure features and clinical implications of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) have not been yet fully described. We sought to compare two different left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) implant strategies: the first one accepting LVSP as a procedural endpoint and the second one aiming at achieving LBBP in every patient in spite of evidence of previous LVSP criteria. METHODS: LVSP was accepted as a procedural endpoint in 162 consecutive patients (LVSP strategy group). In a second phase, LBBP was attempted in every patient in spite of achieving previous LVSP criteria (n = 161, LBBP strategy group). Baseline patient characteristics, implant procedure, and follow-up data were compared. RESULTS: The final capture pattern was LBBP in 71.4% and LVSP in 24.2% in the LBBP strategy group compared to 42.7% and 50%, respectively, in the LVSP strategy group. One hundred and eighty-four patients (57%) had proven LBB capture criteria with a significantly shorter paced QRS duration than the 120 patients (37%) with LVSP criteria (115 ± 9 vs. 121 ± 13 ms, p < .001). Implant parameters were comparable between the two strategies but the LBBP strategy resulted in a higher rate of acute septal perforation (11.8% vs. 4.9%, p = .026) without any clinical sequelae. Patients with CRT indications significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) during follow-up irrespective of the capture pattern (from 35 ± 11% to 45 ± 14% in proven LBBP, p = .024; and from 39 ± 13% to 47 ± 12% for LVSP, p = .003). The presence of structural heart disease and baseline LBBB independently predicted unsuccessful LBB capture. CONCLUSION: The LBBP strategy was associated with comparable implant parameters than the LVSP strategy but resulted in higher rates of septal perforation. Proven LBB capture and LVSP showed comparable effects on LVEF during follow-up.

Tailored electrocardiographic-based criteria for different pacing locations within the left bundle branch.

BACKGROUND: Electrocardiographic (ECG)-based criteria are used to confirm left bundle branch (LBB) pacing (LBBP), but current cutoff values have never been validated for different pacing locations. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe diagnostic performance of V6-R wave peak time (RWPT), V6-V1 interpeak interval, and aVL-RWPT for different pacing sites within the LBB and to determine 100% specific values for each criterion at each pacing location. METHODS: Consecutive patients with confirmed LBBP were selected. Population was divided into subgroups based on the site of pacing: left bundle trunk pacing (LBTP), left septal fascicular pacing (LSFP), left posterior fascicular pacing (LPFP), and left anterior fascicular pacing (LAFP). RESULTS: A total of 147 patients with unequivocal LBB capture were analyzed. Left fascicular pacing was more frequently achieved (82.8%) than LBTP (17.2%). Diagnostic performance of V6-RWPT, V6-V1 interpeak interval, and aVL-RWPT for discrimination of LBBP was good in all subgroups. V6-RWPT cutoff values with 100% specificity (SP) for LBBP discrimination were 75 ms in LBTP, 68 ms in LPFP, 81 ms in LAFP, and 79.5 ms in LSFP. V6-V1 interpeak interval cutoff values with 100% SP for LBBP discrimination were 35.5 ms in LBTP, 53.5 ms in LPFP, 41 ms in LAFP, and 46 ms in LSFP. In LAFP, aVL-RWPT cutoff value with 100% SP for LBBP discrimination was 68 ms, but was 74 ms in LBTP, 74.5 ms in LSFP, and 73.5 ms in LPFP. CONCLUSIONS: Tailored ECG-based criteria might be useful to confirm LBBP at different pacing locations within the LBB.

Left ventricular lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy: Current data and potential explanations for the lack of benefit.

The present article reviews the literature on image-guided cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) studies. Improved outcome to CRT has been associated with the placement of a left ventricular (LV) lead in the latest activated segment free from scar. The majority of randomized controlled trials investigating guided LV lead implantation did not show superiority over conventional implantation approaches. Several factors may contribute to this paradoxical observation, including inclusion criteria favoring patients with left bundle branch block who already respond well to conventional anatomical LV lead implantation, differences in activation wavefronts during simultaneous right ventricular and LV pacing, incorrect definition of target regions, and limitations in coronary venous anatomy that prevent access to target regions that are detected by imaging. It is imperative that exclusion of patients lacking access to target regions from these studies would lead to larger benefit of image-guided CRT.