Literature DB >> 22199009

Disparity in left ventricular stimulation among different pacing configurations in cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Jose F Huizar1, Karoly Kaszala, Jayanthi Koneru, Marcin Kowalski, Leroy R Thacker, Mark A Wood, Kenneth A Ellenbogen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) demands high energy utilization due to continuous biventricular pacing. Current technology allows 6 pacing configurations for a bipolar left ventricular (LV) lead. Understanding the energy requirements for each configuration will allow optimization of pacing output. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Pacing impedance, LV voltage threshold at 1.5 ms (rheobase) and 0.4 ms and chronaxie were obtained in 6 LV configurations in 49 consecutive patients undergoing CRT implantation or replacement. Strength-duration curves were derived using the Lapicque formula. Pacing impedances and voltage thresholds at 1.5 and 0.4 ms, calculated minimum threshold energy at chronaxie, current drain, energy thresholds at 0.4 ms, and strength-duration curves were statistically different between LV configurations (P<0.05). The lowest threshold energy requirements were found in Tip→right ventricular (RV) coil and Tip→Can configuration. Energy strength-duration curves involving the ring as the cathode (Ring→RV, Ring→Can, and Ring→Tip) had the highest LV thresholds. The pacing configuration with the lowest energy threshold correlated 89% of the time with the lowest voltage threshold at 0.4 ms. The probability to reach LV thresholds <1.5 V at 0.4 ms was increased from 51% with 2 LV configurations to 67% with 6 LV configurations.
CONCLUSIONS: Pacing impedance, LV thresholds, minimum threshold energy at chronaxie, current drain, voltage, and energy strength-duration curves were statistically different between LV pacing configurations. LV pacing configuration with the lowest voltage threshold does not always reflects the lowest energy threshold, particularly in the presence of a low impedance configuration. The availability of 6 LV configurations increases the probability of optimizing LV pacing output.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22199009      PMCID: PMC9163842          DOI: 10.1161/CIRCEP.111.965475

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol        ISSN: 1941-3084


  16 in total

1.  The effect of electronic repositioning on left ventricular pacing and phrenic nerve stimulation.

Authors:  Jean Champagne; Jeffrey S Healey; Andrew D Krahn; Francois Philippon; Osnat Gurevitz; Anne Swearingen; Michael Glikson
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 5.214

2.  High impedance leads and safety margin. Electrical considerations based on a simplified expression of the 'paradigm'.

Authors:  J Clementy; D Rouves; S Garrigue; S S Barold; P Jaïs; M Haïssaguerre
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 5.214

3.  Threshold measurements: ten rules for good measuring practice.

Authors:  Werner Irnich
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 1.976

4.  Programmable multiple pacing configurations help to overcome high left ventricular pacing thresholds and avoid phrenic nerve stimulation.

Authors:  Osnat Gurevitz; Eyal Nof; Shemy Carasso; David Luria; David Bar-Lev; Nechemya Tanami; Michael Eldar; Michael Glikson
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 1.976

5.  The terms "chronaxie" and "rheobase" are 100 years old.

Authors:  Werner Irnich
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2010-01-28       Impact factor: 1.976

6.  Influence of pacing configurations, body mass index, and position of coronary sinus lead on frequency of phrenic nerve stimulation and pacing thresholds under cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Martin Seifert; Thomas Schau; Viviane Moeller; Michael Neuss; Juergen Meyhoefer; Christian Butter
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 5.214

7.  Impact of automatic threshold capture on pulse generator longevity.

Authors:  Ruo-han Chen; Ke-ping Chen; Fang-zheng Wang; Wei Hua; Shu Zhang
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2006-06-05       Impact factor: 2.628

8.  Long-term performance of coronary sinus leads used for cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Assunta Iuliano; Gergana Shopova; Antonio De Simone; Francesco Solimene; Pietro Turco; Natale Marrazzo; Vincenzo La Rocca; Carmine Ciardiello; Marco Agrusta; Giuseppe Stabile
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 1.976

9.  Strength duration curve for epicardial left ventricular stimulation.

Authors:  Monique Scally; Karen J Heston; Andrew G Rudnick; Florin T Deger; Richard M Greenberg
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 1.976

10.  Fluctuation of left ventricular thresholds and required safety margin for left ventricular pacing with cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Haran Burri; Bart Gerritse; Lynn Davenport; Myriam Demas; Christian Sticherling
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2009-05-12       Impact factor: 5.214

View more
  1 in total

1.  Comparison of different pacing strategies to minimize phrenic nerve stimulation in cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Jose F Huizar; Karoly Kaszala; Jayanthi N Koneru; Leroy R Thacker; Kenneth A Ellenbogen
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2013-04-26
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.