Romain Eschalier1, Sylvain Ploux2, Joost Lumens3, Zachary Whinnett4, Niraj Varma5, Valentin Meillet6, Philippe Ritter6, Pierre Jaïs6, Michel Haïssaguerre6, Pierre Bordachar6. 1. Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut-Lévêque, CHU Bordeaux, Université Bordeaux, IHU LIRYC, Bordeaux, France; Clermont Université, Université d'Auvergne, Cardio Vascular Interventional Therapy and Imaging (CaVITI), Image Science for Interventional Techniques (ISIT), UMR6284, and CHU Clermont-Ferrand, Cardiology Department, F-63003 Clermont-Ferrand, France. 2. Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut-Lévêque, CHU Bordeaux, Université Bordeaux, IHU LIRYC, Bordeaux, France. Electronic address: sylvain.ploux@gmail.com. 3. Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut-Lévêque, CHU Bordeaux, Université Bordeaux, IHU LIRYC, Bordeaux, France; Maastricht University, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht, The Netherlands. 4. Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom. 5. Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 6. Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut-Lévêque, CHU Bordeaux, Université Bordeaux, IHU LIRYC, Bordeaux, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) leads to prolonged left ventricular (LV) total activation time (TAT) and ventricular electrical uncoupling (VEU; mean LV activation time minus mean right ventricular [RV] activation time); both have been shown to be preferential targets for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Whether right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP) produces similar ventricular activation patterns has not been well studied. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare electrical ventricular activation patterns during RVAP and LBBB. METHODS: We performed ECG mapping during sinus rhythm, RVAP, and CRT in 24 patients with LBBB. RESULTS: We observed differences in the electrical activation pattern with RVAP compared to LBBB. During LBBB, RV activation occurred rapidly; in contrast, RV activation was prolonged during RVAP (46 ± 21 ms vs 69 ± 17 ms, P <.001). There was no significant difference in LVTAT; however, differences in conduction pattern were observed. During LBBB, LV activation was circumferential, whereas with RVAP, LV activation proceeded from apex to base. Differences in the number, size, and orientation of lines of slow conduction also were observed. With LBBB, VEU was nearly twice as long as during RVAP (73 ± 12 ms vs 38 ± 21 ms, P <.001). CRT resulted in a greater reduction in VEU relative to LBBB activation (P <.001). CONCLUSION: RVAP produces significant differences in ventricular activation characteristics compared to LBBB. Significantly less VEU occurs with RVAP, and as a result CRT produces a smaller relative reduction in VEU. This may explain the finding that CRT appears to be more effective in patients with LBBB than in those who were upgraded because of high percentages of RV pacing.
BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) leads to prolonged left ventricular (LV) total activation time (TAT) and ventricular electrical uncoupling (VEU; mean LV activation time minus mean right ventricular [RV] activation time); both have been shown to be preferential targets for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Whether right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP) produces similar ventricular activation patterns has not been well studied. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare electrical ventricular activation patterns during RVAP and LBBB. METHODS: We performed ECG mapping during sinus rhythm, RVAP, and CRT in 24 patients with LBBB. RESULTS: We observed differences in the electrical activation pattern with RVAP compared to LBBB. During LBBB, RV activation occurred rapidly; in contrast, RV activation was prolonged during RVAP (46 ± 21 ms vs 69 ± 17 ms, P <.001). There was no significant difference in LVTAT; however, differences in conduction pattern were observed. During LBBB, LV activation was circumferential, whereas with RVAP, LV activation proceeded from apex to base. Differences in the number, size, and orientation of lines of slow conduction also were observed. With LBBB, VEU was nearly twice as long as during RVAP (73 ± 12 ms vs 38 ± 21 ms, P <.001). CRT resulted in a greater reduction in VEU relative to LBBB activation (P <.001). CONCLUSION: RVAP produces significant differences in ventricular activation characteristics compared to LBBB. Significantly less VEU occurs with RVAP, and as a result CRT produces a smaller relative reduction in VEU. This may explain the finding that CRT appears to be more effective in patients with LBBB than in those who were upgraded because of high percentages of RV pacing.
Authors: David Soto Iglesias; Nicolas Duchateau; Constantine Butakoff Kostantyn Butakov; David Andreu; Juan Fernandez-Armenta; Bart Bijnens; Antonio Berruezo; Marta Sitges; Oscar Camara Journal: IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med Date: 2016-12-16 Impact factor: 3.316
Authors: Benjamin J Sieniewicz; Justin Gould; Bradley Porter; Baldeep S Sidhu; Jonathan M Behar; Simon Claridge; Steve Niederer; Christopher A Rinaldi Journal: Expert Rev Med Devices Date: 2018-07-30 Impact factor: 3.166
Authors: Angela W C Lee; Declan P O'Regan; Justin Gould; Baldeep Sidhu; Benjamin Sieniewicz; Gernot Plank; David R Warriner; Pablo Lamata; Christopher A Rinaldi; Steven A Niederer Journal: Biophys J Date: 2019-08-28 Impact factor: 4.033