Fabien Squara1, Didier Scarlatti2, Philippe Riccini2, Gauthier Garret2, Pamela Moceri2, Emile Ferrari2. 1. CHU de Nice, Hôpital Pasteur, Service de Cardiologie, 30 Avenue de la Voie Romaine, CS 51069, 06001, Nice Cedex 1, France. fabiensquara@gmail.com. 2. CHU de Nice, Hôpital Pasteur, Service de Cardiologie, 30 Avenue de la Voie Romaine, CS 51069, 06001, Nice Cedex 1, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fluoroscopic criteria have been described for the documentation of septal right ventricular (RV) lead positioning, but their accuracy remains questioned. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients undergoing pacemaker or defibrillator implantation were prospectively included. RV lead was positioned using postero-anterior and left anterior oblique 40° incidences, and right anterior oblique 30° to rule out coronary sinus positioning when suspected. RV lead positioning using fluoroscopy was compared to true RV lead positioning as assessed by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). Precise anatomical localizations were determined with both modalities; then, RV lead positioning was ultimately dichotomized into two simple clinically relevant categories: RV septal or RV free wall. Accuracy of fluoroscopy for RV lead positioning was then assessed by comparison with TTE. We included 100 patients. On TTE, 66/100 had a septal RV lead and 34/100 had a free wall RV lead. Fluoroscopy had moderate agreement with TTE for precise anatomical localization of RV lead (k = 0.53), and poor agreement for septal/free wall localization (k = 0.36). For predicting septal RV lead positioning, classical fluoroscopy criteria had a high sensitivity (95.5%; 63/66 patients having a septal RV lead on TTE were correctly identified by fluoroscopy) but a very low specificity (35.3%; only 12/34 patients having a free wall RV lead on TTE were correctly identified by fluoroscopy). CONCLUSION: Classical fluoroscopy criteria have a poor accuracy for identifying RV free wall leads, which are most of the time misclassified as septal. This raises important concerns about the efficacy and safety of RV lead positioning using classical fluoroscopy criteria.
BACKGROUND: Fluoroscopic criteria have been described for the documentation of septal right ventricular (RV) lead positioning, but their accuracy remains questioned. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients undergoing pacemaker or defibrillator implantation were prospectively included. RV lead was positioned using postero-anterior and left anterior oblique 40° incidences, and right anterior oblique 30° to rule out coronary sinus positioning when suspected. RV lead positioning using fluoroscopy was compared to true RV lead positioning as assessed by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). Precise anatomical localizations were determined with both modalities; then, RV lead positioning was ultimately dichotomized into two simple clinically relevant categories: RV septal or RV free wall. Accuracy of fluoroscopy for RV lead positioning was then assessed by comparison with TTE. We included 100 patients. On TTE, 66/100 had a septal RV lead and 34/100 had a free wall RV lead. Fluoroscopy had moderate agreement with TTE for precise anatomical localization of RV lead (k = 0.53), and poor agreement for septal/free wall localization (k = 0.36). For predicting septal RV lead positioning, classical fluoroscopy criteria had a high sensitivity (95.5%; 63/66 patients having a septal RV lead on TTE were correctly identified by fluoroscopy) but a very low specificity (35.3%; only 12/34 patients having a free wall RV lead on TTE were correctly identified by fluoroscopy). CONCLUSION: Classical fluoroscopy criteria have a poor accuracy for identifying RV free wall leads, which are most of the time misclassified as septal. This raises important concerns about the efficacy and safety of RV lead positioning using classical fluoroscopy criteria.
Authors: Oscar Cano; Joaquín Osca; María-José Sancho-Tello; Juan M Sánchez; Víctor Ortiz; José E Castro; Antonio Salvador; José Olagüe Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2010-03-30 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Andrew D McGavigan; Kurt C Roberts-Thomson; Richard J Hillock; Irene H Stevenson; Harry G Mond Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 1.976