AIMS: Assessment of complications following implantation of transvenous ventricular electrodes to pace the left ventricle. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients with severe cardiac failure and left bundle branch block were prospectively followed for adverse effects of implantation of a left ventricular transvenous pacing system. Immediate follow-up was associated with loss of left ventricular pacing in nine patients (32%). This was due to lead dislodgement in four cases (corrected by re-operation in three of these cases), and due to increased threshold in five cases (corrected by programming a higher pacing amplitude in all five cases, but with intermittent diaphragmatic contraction in one case). After 1 month, one patient died, one patient with severe coronary heart disease suffered a myocardial infarction, and left ventricular pacing was lost in two patients. Pericardial effusion, new significant ventricular arrhythmias or other adverse effects were not observed. After a mean follow-up of 16 +/- 9.2 months, pacing leads remained stable and no late complications related to the transvenous left ventricular epicardial pacing were observed. CONCLUSION: Placement of a permanent lead in a tributary of the coronary sinus is feasible without serious adverse effects during the first month. The only frequent adverse event was lead dislodgement; a finding which emphasizes the need for development of specially designed leads for this application.
AIMS: Assessment of complications following implantation of transvenous ventricular electrodes to pace the left ventricle. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients with severe cardiac failure and left bundle branch block were prospectively followed for adverse effects of implantation of a left ventricular transvenous pacing system. Immediate follow-up was associated with loss of left ventricular pacing in nine patients (32%). This was due to lead dislodgement in four cases (corrected by re-operation in three of these cases), and due to increased threshold in five cases (corrected by programming a higher pacing amplitude in all five cases, but with intermittent diaphragmatic contraction in one case). After 1 month, one patient died, one patient with severe coronary heart disease suffered a myocardial infarction, and left ventricular pacing was lost in two patients. Pericardial effusion, new significant ventricular arrhythmias or other adverse effects were not observed. After a mean follow-up of 16 +/- 9.2 months, pacing leads remained stable and no late complications related to the transvenous left ventricular epicardial pacing were observed. CONCLUSION: Placement of a permanent lead in a tributary of the coronary sinus is feasible without serious adverse effects during the first month. The only frequent adverse event was lead dislodgement; a finding which emphasizes the need for development of specially designed leads for this application.
Authors: Gorav Ailawadi; Damien J Lapar; Brian R Swenson; Cory D Maxwell; Micah E Girotti; James D Bergin; John A Kern; John P Dimarco; Srijoy Mahapatra Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2010-01-20 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Andrea Antonio Papa; Anna Rago; Roberta Petillo; Paola D'Ambrosio; Marianna Scutifero; Marisa DE Feo; Ciro Maiello; Alberto Palladino Journal: Acta Myol Date: 2017-12-01
Authors: Etem Caliskan; Florian Fischer; Felix Schoenrath; Maximilian Y Emmert; Francesco Maisano; Volkmar Falk; Christoph T Starck; Tomas Holubec Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2017-11-08 Impact factor: 1.637