AIM: Failure rate to implant left ventricular (LV) lead transvenously is 4-8% in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) patients. Epicardial lead placement is an alternative method and if not applicable case reports and small series showed the feasibility of endocardial LV lead implantation. Electroanatomical mapping might be a useful tool to guide this procedure. METHODS AND RESULTS: Four patients had undergone endocardial LV lead implantation after unsuccessful transvenous implantation or epicardial LV lead dysfunction using the transseptal approach. Electroanatomical mapping was used to mark the location of the transseptal puncture. This location point guided the mapping catheter from the subclavian access and facilitated positioning of the LV lead at the adjacent latest activation area of the left ventricle detected by activation mapping. Endocardial active fixation LV leads were successfully implanted in all patients with stable electrical parameters immediately after implantation and over a mean follow-up of 18.3 months (lead impedance 520 ± 177 vs. 439 ± 119 Ω and pacing threshold 0.8 ± 0.2 V, 0.5 ms vs. 0.6 ± 0.1 V, 0.5 ms, respectively). Patients were maintained on anticoagulation therapy with a target international normalized ratio of 3.5-4.5 and did not show any thromboembolic, haemorrhagic events, or infection. Echocardiography showed significant improvement of LV systolic function with marked improvement of the functional status. CONCLUSIONS: Electroanatomical mapping is a useful technical tool to guide endocardial LV lead implantation. It helps to identify the location of the transseptal puncture and the use of activation mapping might facilitate location of the optimal lead positions during CRT.
AIM: Failure rate to implant left ventricular (LV) lead transvenously is 4-8% in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) patients. Epicardial lead placement is an alternative method and if not applicable case reports and small series showed the feasibility of endocardial LV lead implantation. Electroanatomical mapping might be a useful tool to guide this procedure. METHODS AND RESULTS: Four patients had undergone endocardial LV lead implantation after unsuccessful transvenous implantation or epicardial LV lead dysfunction using the transseptal approach. Electroanatomical mapping was used to mark the location of the transseptal puncture. This location point guided the mapping catheter from the subclavian access and facilitated positioning of the LV lead at the adjacent latest activation area of the left ventricle detected by activation mapping. Endocardial active fixation LV leads were successfully implanted in all patients with stable electrical parameters immediately after implantation and over a mean follow-up of 18.3 months (lead impedance 520 ± 177 vs. 439 ± 119 Ω and pacing threshold 0.8 ± 0.2 V, 0.5 ms vs. 0.6 ± 0.1 V, 0.5 ms, respectively). Patients were maintained on anticoagulation therapy with a target international normalized ratio of 3.5-4.5 and did not show any thromboembolic, haemorrhagic events, or infection. Echocardiography showed significant improvement of LV systolic function with marked improvement of the functional status. CONCLUSIONS: Electroanatomical mapping is a useful technical tool to guide endocardial LV lead implantation. It helps to identify the location of the transseptal puncture and the use of activation mapping might facilitate location of the optimal lead positions during CRT.
Authors: László Gellér; Zoltán Salló; Levente Molnár; Tamás Tahin; Emin Evren Özcan; Valentina Kutyifa; István Osztheimer; Szabolcs Szilágyi; Nándor Szegedi; Pál Ábrahám; Astrid Apor; Klaudia Vivien Nagy; Annamária Kosztin; Dávid Becker; Szilvia Herczeg; Endre Zima; Béla Merkely Journal: Europace Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 5.214