Comparison of novel intrinsic versus conventional antitachycardia pacing for ventricular tachycardia among implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Intrinsic antitachycardia pacing (iATP) is a novel automated antitachycardia pacing (ATP) that provides individual treatment to terminate ventricular tachycardia (VT). However, the clinical efficacy of iATP in comparison with conventional ATP is unknown. We aim to compare the termination rate of VT between iATP and conventional ATP in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators using a unique setting of different sequential orders of both ATP algorisms. METHODS: Patients with the iATP algorithm were assigned to iATP-first and conventional ATP-first groups sequentially. In the iATP-first group, a maximum of seven iATP sequences were delivered, followed by conventional burst and ramp pacing. In contrast, in the conventional ATP-first group, two bursts and ramp pacing were initially programmed, followed by iATP sequences. We compared the success rates of VT termination in the first and secondary programmed ATP zones between the two groups. RESULTS: Fifty-eight and 56 patients were enrolled in the iATP-first and conventional ATP-first groups, and 67 and 44 VTs were analyzed in each group, respectively. At the first single ATP therapy, success rates were 64% and 70% in the iATP and conventional groups, respectively. At the end of the first iATP treatment zone, the success rate increased from 64% to 85%. Moreover, secondary iATP therapy following the failure of conventional ATPs increased the success rate from 80% to 93%. There was a significant benefit of alternative iATP for VT termination compared to secondary conventional ATP (100% vs. 33%, p = .028). CONCLUSIONS: iATP may be beneficial as a secondary therapy after failure of conventional ATP to terminate VT.

Atrial Pacing Negatively Affects Left Atrial Morphological and Functional Parameters Similarly to Atrioventricular Dyssynchrony.

Background and Objectives: Atrioventricular (AV) dyssynchrony as well as atrial and ventricular pacing affect left atrial (LA) function. We conducted a study evaluating the effect of atrial and ventricular pacing on LA morphological and functional changes after dual-chamber pacemaker implantation. Materials and Methods: The study prospectively enrolled 121 subjects who had a dual-chamber pacemaker implanted due to sinus node disease (SND) or atrioventricular block (AVB). Subjects were divided into three groups based on indication and pacemaker programming: (1) SND DDDR 60; (2) AVB DDD 60 and (3) AVB DDD 40. Subjects were invited to one- and three-month follow-up visits. Three subsets based on pacing burden were analyzed: (1) high atrial (A) low ventricular (V); (2) high A, high V and (3) low A, high V. LA function was assessed from volumetric parameters and measured strains from echocardiography. Results: The high A, low V group consisted of 38 subjects; while high A, high V had 26 and low A, high V had 23. A significant decrease in reservoir and contractile LA strain parameters were only observed in the high A, low V pacing group after three months (reservoir 25.9 ± 10.3% vs. 21.1 ± 9.9%, p = 0.003, contractile -14.0 ± 9.0% vs. -11.1 ± 7.8, p = 0.018). While the re-established atrioventricular synchrony in the low A, high V group maintained reservoir LA strain at the baseline level after three months (21.4 ± 10.4% vs. 22.5 ± 10.4%, p = 0.975); in the high A, high V group, a further trend to decrease was noted (20.3 ± 8.9% vs. 18.7 ± 8.3%, p = 0.231). Conclusions: High atrial pacing burden independently of atrioventricular dyssynchrony and ventricular pacing impairs LA functional and morphological parameters. Changes appear soon after pacemaker implantation and are maintained.

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.

Leadless pacemakers at 5-year follow-up: the Micra transcatheter pacing system post-approval registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Prior reports have demonstrated a favourable safety and efficacy profile of the Micra leadless pacemaker over mid-term follow-up; however, long-term outcomes in real-world clinical practice remain unknown. Updated performance of the Micra VR leadless pacemaker through five years from the worldwide post-approval registry (PAR) was assessed. METHODS: All Micra PAR patients undergoing implant attempts were included. Endpoints included system- or procedure-related major complications and system revision rate for any cause through 60 months post-implant. Rates were compared through 36 months post-implant to a reference dataset of 2667 transvenous pacemaker patients using Fine-Gray competing risk models. RESULTS: 1809 patients were enrolled between July 2015 and March 2018 and underwent implant attempts from 179 centres in 23 countries with a median follow-up period of 51.1 months (IQR: 21.6-64.2). The major complication rate at 60 months was 4.5% [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.6%-5.5%] and was 4.1% at 36 months, which was significantly lower than the 8.5% rate observed for transvenous systems (HR: .47, 95% CI: .36-.61; P < .001). The all-cause system revision rate at 60 months was 4.9% (95% CI: 3.9%-6.1%). System revisions among Micra patients were mostly for device upgrades (41.2%) or elevated thresholds (30.6%). There were no Micra removals due to infection noted over the duration of follow-up. At 36 months, the system revision rate was significantly lower with Micra vs. transvenous systems (3.2% vs. 6.6%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term outcomes with the Micra leadless pacemaker continue to demonstrate low rates of major complications and system revisions and an extremely low incidence of infection.

Prediction of pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy using a convolutional neural network based on clinical findings prior to pacemaker implantation.

Risk factors for pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) have been previously reported, including a high burden of right ventricular pacing, lower left ventricular ejection fraction, a wide QRS duration, and left bundle branch block before pacemaker implantation (PMI). However, predicting the development of PICM remains challenging. This study aimed to use a convolutional neural network (CNN) model, based on clinical findings before PMI, to predict the development of PICM. Out of a total of 561 patients with dual-chamber PMI, 165 (mean age 71.6 years, 89 men [53.9%]) who underwent echocardiography both before and after dual-chamber PMI were enrolled. During a mean follow-up period of 1.7 years, 47 patients developed PICM. A CNN algorithm for prediction of the development of PICM was constructed based on a dataset prior to PMI that included 31 variables such as age, sex, body mass index, left ventricular ejection fraction, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, left ventricular end-systolic diameter, left atrial diameter, severity of mitral regurgitation, severity of tricuspid regurgitation, ischemic heart disease, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, heart failure, New York Heart Association class, atrial fibrillation, the etiology of bradycardia (sick sinus syndrome or atrioventricular block) , right ventricular (RV) lead tip position (apex, septum, left bundle, His bundle, RV outflow tract), left bundle branch block, QRS duration, white blood cell count, haemoglobin, platelet count, serum total protein, albumin, aspartate transaminase, alanine transaminase, estimated glomerular filtration rate, sodium, potassium, C-reactive protein, and brain natriuretic peptide. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the CNN model were 75.8%, 55.6%, 83.3% and 0.78 respectively. The CNN model could accurately predict the development of PICM using clinical findings before PMI. This model could be useful for screening patients at risk of developing PICM, ensuring timely upgrades to physiological pacing to avoid missing the optimal intervention window.

Strategies to improve atrioventricular synchrony in patients with a Micra AV leadless pacemaker.

The second generation of transcatheter pacing systems, called Micra AV, can provide atrioventricular (AV) synchronous pacing via a new pacing algorithm relying on sensing mechanical atrial contraction. Several novel programming parameters were introduced to enable AV synchronous pacing, including an A3 window and A4 window as well as a conduction mode switch and an activity mode switch. In addition to several automated features, manual programming optimization of some of the novel parameters is key to improving AV synchrony. A solid knowledge of the features and their programming is essential for electrophysiologists implanting or following patients with Micra AV devices. Differences in programming optimization might partially explain the high variability of AV synchrony published in real-world data reports. This article reviews the key programming parameters of Micra AV. Subsequently, optimal programming recommendations for defined patient profiles are presented. Those were established by consensus within an expert panel comprised of 11 European electrophysiologists from high-volume Micra AV centres. The patient profiles were (1) high degree AV block and slow sinus rhythm; (2) high degree AV block and fast sinus rhythm; and (3) intermittent AV block. The panel recommended to evaluate the mechanical atrial activity on transthoracic echocardiography prior to implant. It was also agreed that Auto A3 Threshold and Tracking Check should be turned off in all patients, AV conduction mode switch should be turned off in all patients with high degree AV block, and the lower rate should be programmed to 50 bpm with exceptions based on individual clinical assessment. Future studies will be useful to evaluate the strength of those recommendations to improve the AV synchrony.

Aveir VR real-world performance and chronic pacing threshold prediction using mapping and fixation electrical data.

AIMS: Aveir VR performance and predictors for its pacing threshold (PCT) in a real-world cohort were investigated. METHODS: Electrical measurements at various stages of an Aveir VR implant were prospectively collected. Predictors for 3-month PCT were studied. A retrospective cohort of consecutive 139 Micra implants was used to compare the PCT evolution. High PCT was defined as ≥1.5 V, using a pulse width of 0.4 ms for Aveir and 0.24 ms for Micra. Excellent PCT was defined as ≤0.5 V at the respective pulse width. RESULTS: Among the 123 consecutive Aveir VR implant attempts, 122 (99.2%) were successful. The majority were of advanced age (mean 79.7) and small body size (mean BSA 1.60). Two patients (1.6%) experienced complications, including one pericardial effusion after device reposition and one intraoperative device dislodgement. Eighty-eight patients reached a 3-month follow-up. Aveir 3-month PCT was correlated with impedance at mapping (P = 0.015), tether mode (P < 0.001), end-of-procedure (P < 0.001), and mapping PCT (P = 0.035), but not with PCTs after fixation (P > 0.05). Tether mode impedance >470 ohms had 88% sensitivity and 71% specificity in predicting excellent 3-month PCT. Although it is more common for Aveir to have high PCT at end of procedure (11.5% for Aveir and 2.2% for Micra, P = 0.004), the rate at 3 months was similar (2.3% for Aveir and 3.1% for Micra, P = 1.000). CONCLUSION: Aveir VR demonstrated satisfactory performance in this high-risk cohort. Pacing thresholds tend to improve to a greater extent than Micra after implantation. The PCT after fixation, even after a waiting period, has limited predictive value for the chronic threshold. Low-mapping PCT and high intraoperative impedance predict chronic low PCT.

Prognostic benefits of His-Purkinje capture in physiological pacemakers for bradycardia.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical outcomes of long-term ventricular septal pacing (VSP) without His-Purkinje capture remain unknown. This study evaluated the differences in clinical outcomes between conduction system pacing (CSP), VSP, and right ventricular pacing (RVP). METHODS: Consecutive patients with bradycardia indicated for pacing from 2016 to 2022 were prospectively followed for the clinical endpoints of heart failure (HF)-hospitalizations and all-cause mortality at 2 years. VSP was defined as septal pacing due to unsuccessful CSP implant or successful CSP followed by loss of His-Purkinje capture within 90 days. RESULTS: Among 1016 patients (age 73.9 ± 11.2 years, 47% female, 48% atrioventricular block), 612 received RVP, 335 received CSP and 69 received VSP. Paced QRS duration was similar between VSP and RVP, but both significantly longer than CSP (p < .05). HF-hospitalizations occurred in 130 (13%) patients (CSP 7% vs. RVP 16% vs. VSP 13%, p = .001), and all-cause mortality in 143 (14%) patients (CSP 7% vs. RVP 19% vs. VSP 9%, p < .001). The association of pacing modality with clinical events was limited to those with ventricular pacing (Vp) > 20% (pinteraction < .05). Adjusting for clinical risk factors among patients with Vp > 20%, VSP (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR]: 4.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.57-14.36) and RVP (AHR: 3.08, 95% CI: 1.44-6.60) were associated with increased hazard of HF-hospitalizations, and RVP (2.52, 95% CI: 1.19-5.35) with increased mortality, compared to CSP. Clinical endpoints did not differ between VSP and RVP with Vp > 20%, or amongst groups with Vp < 20%. CONCLUSION: Conduction system capture is associated with improved clinical outcomes. CSP should be preferred over VSP or RVP during pacing for bradycardia.

Delivery catheter system carries more physiological right ventricular septal pacing than stylet system.

INTRODUCTION: The Mt. FUJI multicenter trial demonstrated that a delivery catheter system had a higher rate of successful right ventricular (RV) lead deployment on the RV septum (RVS) than a conventional stylet system. In this subanalysis of the Mt. FUJI trial, we assessed the differences in electrocardiogram (ECG) parameters during RV pacing between a delivery catheter system and a stylet system and their associations with the lead tip positions. METHODS: Among 70 patients enrolled in the Mt FUJI trial, ECG parameters, RV lead tip positions, and lead depth inside the septum assessed by computed tomography were compared between the catheter group (n = 36) and stylet group (n = 34). RESULTS: The paced QRS duration (QRS-d), corrected paced QT (QTc), and JT interval (JTc) were significantly shorter in the catheter group than in the stylet group (QRS-d: 130 ± 19 vs. 142 ± 15 ms, p = .004; QTc: 476 ± 25 vs. 514 ± 20 ms, p < .001; JTc: 347 ± 24 vs. 372 ± 17 ms, p < .001). This superiority of the catheter group was maintained in a subgroup analysis of patients with an RV lead tip position at the septum. The lead depth inside the septum was greater in the catheter group than in the stylet group, and there was a significant negative correlation between the paced QRS-d and the lead depth. CONCLUSION: Using a delivery catheter system carries more physiological depolarization and repolarization during RVS pacing and deeper screw penetration in the septum in comparison to conventional stylet system. The lead depth could have a more impact on the ECG parameters rather than the type of pacing lead.

Perioperative Considerations for Modern Leadless Pacemakers.

Since their initial approval by the Food and Drug Administration in 2016, leadless pacemakers have become increasingly prevalent. This growth has been driven by an improved adverse effect profile when compared to traditional pacemakers, including lower rates of infection, as well as eliminated risk of pocket hematoma and lead complications. More recently, technology enabling leadless synchronized atrioventricular pacing in patients with atrioventricular block has vastly expanded the indications for these devices. Anesthesiologists will increasingly be relied upon to safely care for patients with leadless pacemakers undergoing non-electrophysiology procedures and surgery. This article provides an overview of the technology, evidence base, current indications, and unique perioperative considerations for leadless pacemakers.

Different leadless pacemakers working in harmony (Aveir in the atrium/Micra AV2 in the ventricle) in a patient with dextrocardia and double outlet right ventricle after high-risk infected device extraction.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with congenital heart disease are at increased risk for requiring cardiac pacing during their lifetime. METHODS: We present the first described case of using two leadless pacing systems manufactured by separate companies implanted within the same patient to provide atrial and ventricular pacing due to complex congenital anatomy. RESULTS: A 27-year-old male with dextrocardia with double outlet right ventricle, subaortic ventricular septal defect, and pulmonary stenosis status-post pulmonary valve replacement complicated by ventricular pacing dependence and subsequent atrial pacing dependence after atriotomy-based atypical flutter ablation developed recurrent mediastinitis and pocket infection with erosion despite prolonged antibiotic treatment. Due to atrial and ventricular pacing dependence, a comprehensive congenital care team concluded the need for lead extraction and replacement of pacemaker via leadless peacemaking device. Laser-lead extraction and temporary atrial pacemaker placement was performed. Afterward, a transesophageal echocardiogram guided implantation of both a Micra AV 2 (Medtronic) leadless pacemaker in the interventricular septum within the right ventricle and an Aveir (Abbott) leadless pacemaker in the superior base of the right atrial appendage was performed with successful pacing. Although there is no communication between these devices, atrial-mechanical ventricular pacing was reliable with good implant thresholds, impedances and sensing from both devices. CONCLUSION: Our case demonstrates the feasibility of using dual leadless pacing modalities to simultaneously pace someone at complex, prohibitive risk for temporary permanent or permanent pacemaker devices.

Incidence, Risk Factors, and Outcomes Associated With Permanent Pacemaker Implantation Following Tricuspid Valve Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation following tricuspid valve surgery (TVS) are limited. We sought to evaluate its incidence, risk factors, and outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Medicare beneficiaries who underwent TVS from 2013 to 2020 were identified. Patients who underwent TVS for endocarditis were excluded. The primary exposure of interest was new PPM after TVS. Outcomes included all-cause mortality and readmission with endocarditis or heart failure on follow-up. Among the 13 294 patients who underwent TVS, 2518 (18.9%) required PPM placement. Risk factors included female sex (relative risk [RR], 1.26 [95% CI, 1.17-1.36], P<0.0001), prior sternotomy (RR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.02-1.23], P=0.02), preoperative second-degree heart block (RR, 2.20 [95% CI, 1.81-2.69], P<0.0001), right bundle-branch block (RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.03-1.41], P=0.019), bifascicular block (RR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.06-1.93], P=0.02), and prior malignancy (RR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.01-1.49], P=0.04). Tricuspid valve (TV) replacement was associated with a significantly higher risk of PPM implantation when compared with TV repair (RR, 3.20 [95% CI, 2.16-4.75], P<0.0001). After a median follow-up of 3.1 years, mortality was not different in patients who received PPM compared with patients who did not (hazard ratio [HR], 1.02 [95% CI, 0.93-1.12], P=0.7). PPM placement was not associated with a higher risk of endocarditis but was associated with a higher risk of heart failure readmission (HR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.14-1.43], P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PPM implantation frequently occurs after TVS, notably in female patients and patients undergoing TV replacement. Although mortality is not increased, it is associated with higher rates of heart failure rehospitalization.

Conduction System Stimulation to Avoid Left Ventricle Dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP) can produce left ventricle dysfunction. Conduction system pacing (CSP) has been used successfully to reverse left ventricle dysfunction in patients with left bundle branch block. To date, data about CSP prevention of left ventricle dysfunction in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are scarce and limited mostly to nonrandomized studies. Our aim is to demonstrate that CSP can preserve normal ventricular function compared with RVAP in the setting of a high burden of ventricular pacing. METHODS: Consecutive patients with a high-degree atrioventricular block and preserved or mildly deteriorated LVEF (>40%) were included in this prospective, randomized, parallel, controlled study, comparing conventional RVAP versus CSP. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were randomized, with no differences between basal characteristics in both groups. The stimulated QRS duration was significantly longer in the RVAP group compared with the CSP group (160.4±18.1 versus 124.2±20.2 ms; p<0.01). Seventy patients were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. LVEF showed a significant decrease in the RVAP group at 6 months compared with the CSP group (mean difference, -5.8% [95% CI, -9.6% to -2%]; P<0.01). Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter showed an increase in the RVAP group compared with the CSP group (mean difference, 3.2 [95% CI, 0.1-6.2] mm; P=0.04). Heart failure-related admissions were higher in the RVAP group (22.6% versus 5.1%; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Conduction system stimulation prevents LVEF deterioration and heart failure-related admissions in patients with normal or mildly deteriorated LVEF requiring a high burden of ventricular pacing. These results are only short term and need to be confirmed by further larger studies. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT06026683.

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.

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.

Coronary artery complications after left bundle branch area pacing: An increasingly reported issue in the era of physiologic pacing.

Coronary artery lesions related to pacemaker implantation are rare complications. With the increasing adoption of the technique of permanent transseptal pacing of the left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), an increase in the incidence of these complications may be expected. We report two cases of coronary lesions after permanent transeptal pacing of the LBBAP: the first with a small coronary artery fistula, and the second with an extrinsic coronary compression. Both complications occurred with stylet-driven pacing leads with extendable helix. In the first case, since the shunt volume was small and no major complications were reported, the patient was treated conservatively with good outcome. The second case required lead repositioning due to acute decompensated heart failure.

The effectiveness and safety of temporary transvenous cardiac pacing leads placement into coronary sinus vein in patients with sick sinus syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The temporary pacing lead routinely is placed into right ventricular (RV), which pose a risk of dislocation and cardiac perforation. OBJECTIVE: We aim to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of temporary transvenous cardiac pacing (TTCP) leads placement into the coronary sinus vein (CSV) in patients with sick sinus syndrome (SSS). METHODS: We investigated patients with SSS who underwent TTCP lead placement into the CSV under the guidance of X-ray between January 2013 and May 2023. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: RV group (n = 33) and CSV group (n = 22). The ordinary passive bipolar electrodes were applied in both groups. In RV groups, electrodes were placed into RV. In CSV group, electrodes were placed into CSV. We evaluated the operation duration, fluoroscopic exposure, first-attempt success rate of leads placement, pacing threshold, success rate of leads placement, rate of leads displacement, and complications. RESULTS: Compared with that in RV group, the procedure time, fluoroscopic exposure was significantly prolonged, while the first-attempt success rate of lead placement was obviously increased in CSV group (both p < .05). Compared with that in RV group, the rate of leads displacement is lower in CSV group (both p < .05). There were three patients occurred cardiac perforation in RV group, but no cardiac perforation was reported in CSV group (p > .05). CONCLUSION: TTCP leads placement into the CSV is an effective and safe strategy in patients with SSS. It indicates a high rate of pacing effectiveness with low device replacement and complication rates.