RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is usually performed by biventricular (BiV) pacing. Previously, feasibility of transvenous implantation of a lead at the left ventricular (LV) endocardial side of the interventricular septum, referred to as LV septal (LVs) pacing, was demonstrated. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to compare the acute electrophysiological and hemodynamic effects of LVs with BiV and His bundle (HB) pacing in CRT patients. METHODS: Temporary LVs pacing (transaortic approach) alone or in combination with right ventricular (RV) (LVs+RV), BiV, and HB pacing was performed in 27 patients undergoing CRT implantation. Electrophysiological changes were assessed using electrocardiography (QRS duration), vectorcardiography (QRS area), and multielectrode body surface mapping (standard deviation of activation times [SDAT]). Hemodynamic changes were assessed as the first derivative of LV pressure (LVdP/dtmax). RESULTS: As compared with baseline, LVs pacing resulted in a larger reduction in QRS area (to 73 ± 22 µVs) and SDAT (to 26 ± 7 ms) than BiV (to 93 ± 26 µVs and 31 ± 7 ms; both p < 0.05) and LVs+RV pacing (to 108 ± 37 µVs; p < 0.05; and 29 ± 8 ms; p = 0.05). The increase in LVdP/dtmax was similar during LVs and BiV pacing (17 ± 10% vs. 17 ± 9%, respectively) and larger than during LVs+RV pacing (11 ± 9%; p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between basal, mid-, or apical LVs levels in LVdP/dtmax and SDAT. In a subgroup of 16 patients, changes in QRS area, SDAT, and LVdP/dtmax were comparable between LVs and HB pacing. CONCLUSIONS: LVs pacing provides short-term hemodynamic improvement and electrical resynchronization that is at least as good as during BiV and possibly HB pacing. These results indicate that LVs pacing may serve as a valuable alternative for CRT.