Bradley C Clark1,2, Rohan Kumthekar3, Paige Mass4, Justin D Opfermann4, Charles I Berul3,4,5. 1. Children's Hospital at Montefiore, 3415 Bainbridge Avenue, Bronx, NY, 10467, USA. bradleyclarkep@gmail.com. 2. Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA. bradleyclarkep@gmail.com. 3. Children's National Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA. 4. Sheikh Zayed Institute for Pediatric Surgical Innovation, Washington, DC, USA. 5. George Washington University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe chronic performance of subxiphoid minimally invasive pacemaker lead insertion in a piglet model. METHODS: Minimally invasive pacemaker lead implantation was performed through a 10-mm incision under direct visualization using the PeriPath port. Epicardial access was obtained and the commercially available Medtronic Model 20066 pacemaker lead was inserted into the pericardial space and epicardial fixation was performed using the side-action helix. The lead was connected to a pacemaker generator in a para-rectus pocket. Animals underwent a 12-14-week observation period and lead impedances, R-wave amplitudes, and ventricular capture thresholds were tested biweekly. After the survival period, animals were euthanized and gross and histopathology were performed. RESULTS: Subxiphoid minimally invasive pacemaker lead placement was performed in 8 animals (median 4.9 kg) with 100% acute success. Median procedure time was 65 min (IQR 60.5-77). At implant, median lead impedance was 650 Ω (IQR 244-984), R-wave amplitude 11.1 mV (IQR 8-12.3), and ventricular capture threshold 1.5 V @ 0.4 ms (IQR 1-2.6). Over a median survival period of 13 weeks, there was a median lead impedance change of + 262 Ω (IQR 5.3-618.3), R-wave change of - 4.5 mV (IQR - 7.1-- 2.7) and capture threshold change (1.0 ms) of + 1.5 V (IQR 0-3.3). At autopsy, epicardial fixation sites showed fibrovascular proliferation and minimal chronic inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: Subxiphoid pericardial pacemaker placement is safe and effective in a piglet model. Further study and development of leads designed for pericardial placement are warranted.
PURPOSE: To describe chronic performance of subxiphoid minimally invasive pacemaker lead insertion in a piglet model. METHODS: Minimally invasive pacemaker lead implantation was performed through a 10-mm incision under direct visualization using the PeriPath port. Epicardial access was obtained and the commercially available Medtronic Model 20066 pacemaker lead was inserted into the pericardial space and epicardial fixation was performed using the side-action helix. The lead was connected to a pacemaker generator in a para-rectus pocket. Animals underwent a 12-14-week observation period and lead impedances, R-wave amplitudes, and ventricular capture thresholds were tested biweekly. After the survival period, animals were euthanized and gross and histopathology were performed. RESULTS: Subxiphoid minimally invasive pacemaker lead placement was performed in 8 animals (median 4.9 kg) with 100% acute success. Median procedure time was 65 min (IQR 60.5-77). At implant, median lead impedance was 650 Ω (IQR 244-984), R-wave amplitude 11.1 mV (IQR 8-12.3), and ventricular capture threshold 1.5 V @ 0.4 ms (IQR 1-2.6). Over a median survival period of 13 weeks, there was a median lead impedance change of + 262 Ω (IQR 5.3-618.3), R-wave change of - 4.5 mV (IQR - 7.1-- 2.7) and capture threshold change (1.0 ms) of + 1.5 V (IQR 0-3.3). At autopsy, epicardial fixation sites showed fibrovascular proliferation and minimal chronic inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: Subxiphoid pericardial pacemaker placement is safe and effective in a piglet model. Further study and development of leads designed for pericardial placement are warranted.
Authors: Nima Hatam; Andrea L A Amerini; Frederik Steiner; Mark Lazeroms; Karl Mischke; Patrick Schauerte; Ruediger Autschbach; Jan Spillner Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2010-08-02 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Ami B Bhatt; Elyse Foster; Karen Kuehl; Joseph Alpert; Stephen Brabeck; Stephen Crumb; William R Davidson; Michael G Earing; Brian B Ghoshhajra; Tara Karamlou; Seema Mital; Jennifer Ting; Zian H Tseng Journal: Circulation Date: 2015-04-20 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Yaniv Bar-Cohen; Michael J Silka; Allison C Hill; Jay D Pruetz; Ramen H Chmait; Li Zhou; Sara M Rabin; Viktoria Norekyan; Gerald E Loeb Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2018-07
Authors: Bradley C Clark; Tanya D Davis; Magdy M El-Sayed Ahmed; Robert McCarter; Nobuyuki Ishibashi; Christopher P Jordan; Timothy D Kane; Peter C W Kim; Axel Krieger; Dilip S Nath; Justin D Opfermann; Charles I Berul Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2015-12-09 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Raymond Yee; Fredrik Gadler; Azlan Hussin; Razali Bin Omar; Yaariv Khaykin; Atul Verma; Mark Lazeroms; Douglas S Hine; Kyle R Marquard Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2014-05-04 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Christopher P Jordan; Kyle Wu; John P Costello; Nobuyuki Ishibashi; Axel Krieger; Timothy D Kane; Peter Kim; Charles I Berul Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Dawn E Jaroszewski; Gregory T Altemose; Luis R Scott; Komandoor Srivasthan; Patrick A Devaleria; Jesse Lackey; Francisco A Arabia Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Maully J Shah; Michael J Silka; Jennifer N Avari Silva; Seshadri Balaji; Cheyenne M Beach; Monica N Benjamin; Charles I Berul; Bryan Cannon; Frank Cecchin; Mitchell I Cohen; Aarti S Dalal; Brynn E Dechert; Anne Foster; Roman Gebauer; M Cecilia Gonzalez Corcia; Prince J Kannankeril; Peter P Karpawich; Jeffery J Kim; Mani Ram Krishna; Peter Kubuš; Martin J LaPage; Douglas Y Mah; Lindsey Malloy-Walton; Aya Miyazaki; Kara S Motonaga; Mary C Niu; Melissa Olen; Thomas Paul; Eric Rosenthal; Elizabeth V Saarel; Massimo Stefano Silvetti; Elizabeth A Stephenson; Reina B Tan; John Triedman; Nicholas H Von Bergen; Philip L Wackel Journal: Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J Date: 2021-07-29