Literature DB >> 33671420

Comparing Ventricular Synchrony in Left Bundle Branch and Left Ventricular Septal Pacing in Pacemaker Patients.

Luuk I B Heckman1, Justin G L M Luermans2,3, Karol Curila4, Antonius M W Van Stipdonk2, Sjoerd Westra3, Radovan Smisek5,6, Frits W Prinzen1, Kevin Vernooy2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has recently been introduced as a novel physiological pacing strategy. Within LBBAP, distinction is made between left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP, no left bundle capture).
OBJECTIVE: To investigate acute electrophysiological effects of LBBP and LVSP as compared to intrinsic ventricular conduction.
METHODS: Fifty patients with normal cardiac function and pacemaker indication for bradycardia underwent LBBAP. Electrocardiography (ECG) characteristics were evaluated during pacing at various depths within the septum: starting at the right ventricular (RV) side of the septum: the last position with QS morphology, the first position with r' morphology, LVSP and-in patients where left bundle branch (LBB) capture was achieved-LBBP. From the ECG's QRS duration and QRS morphology in lead V1, the stimulus- left ventricular activation time left ventricular activation time (LVAT) interval were measured. After conversion of the ECG into vectorcardiogram (VCG) (Kors conversion matrix), QRS area and QRS vector in transverse plane (Azimuth) were determined.
RESULTS: QRS area significantly decreased from 82 ± 29 µVs during RV septal pacing (RVSP) to 46 ± 12 µVs during LVSP. In the subgroup where LBB capture was achieved (n = 31), QRS area significantly decreased from 46 ± 17 µVs during LVSP to 38 ± 15 µVs during LBBP, while LVAT was not significantly different between LVSP and LBBP. In patients with normal ventricular activation and narrow QRS, QRS area during LBBP was not significantly different from that during intrinsic activation (37 ± 16 vs. 35 ± 19 µVs, respectively). The Azimuth significantly changed from RVSP (-46 ± 33°) to LVSP (19 ± 16°) and LBBP (-22 ± 14°). The Azimuth during both LVSP and LBBP were not significantly different from normal ventricular activation. QRS area and LVAT correlated moderately (Spearman's R = 0.58).
CONCLUSIONS: ECG and VCG indices demonstrate that both LVSP and LBBP improve ventricular dyssynchrony considerably as compared to RVSP, to values close to normal ventricular activation. LBBP seems to result in a small, but significant, improvement in ventricular synchrony as compared to LVSP.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bradycardia pacing; cardiac resynchronization therapy; left bundle branch area pacing

Year:  2021        PMID: 33671420     DOI: 10.3390/jcm10040822

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Med        ISSN: 2077-0383            Impact factor:   4.241


  8 in total

1.  Initial Experience with Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing with Conventional Stylet-Driven Extendable Screw-In Leads and New Pre-Shaped Delivery Sheaths.

Authors:  Kyeongmin Byeon; Hye Ree Kim; Seung-Jung Park; Young Jun Park; Ji-Hoon Choi; Ju Youn Kim; Kyoung-Min Park; Young Keun On; June Soo Kim
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 4.964

2.  A single-centre prospective evaluation of left bundle branch area pacemaker implantation characteristics.

Authors:  L I B Heckman; J G L M Luermans; M Jastrzębski; B Weijs; A M W Van Stipdonk; S Westra; D den Uijl; D Linz; M Mafi-Rad; F W Prinzen; K Vernooy
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2022-04-05       Impact factor: 2.854

3.  A Comparison of the Electrophysiological and Anatomic Characteristics of Pacing Different Branches of the Left Bundle Conduction System.

Authors:  Xi Liu; Min Gu; Hong-Xia Niu; Xuhua Chen; Chi Cai; Junhan Zhao; Minsi Cai; Xiaohong Zhou; Michael R Gold; Shu Zhang; Wei Hua
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-01-05

4.  Which Is More Likely to Achieve Cardiac Synchronization: Left Bundle Branch Pacing or Left Ventricular Septal Pacing?

Authors:  Kailun Zhu; Dong Chang; Qiang Li
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-03-28

Review 5.  Ventricular Dyssynchrony and Pacing-induced Cardiomyopathy in Patients with Pacemakers, the Utility of Ultra-high-frequency ECG and Other Dyssynchrony Assessment Tools.

Authors:  Jan Mizner; Pavel Jurak; Hana Linkova; Radovan Smisek; Karol Curila
Journal:  Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev       Date:  2022-04

6.  Left bundle branch pacing in a ventricular pacing dependent patient with heart failure: A case report.

Authors:  Bing-Xue Song; Xia-Xia Wang; Yi An; Ying-Ying Zhang
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2022-07-16       Impact factor: 1.534

Review 7.  Criteria for differentiating left bundle branch pacing and left ventricular septal pacing: A systematic review.

Authors:  Kailun Zhu; Linlin Li; Jianghai Liu; Dong Chang; Qiang Li
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-09-30

8.  Left Ventricular Myocardial Septal Pacing in Close Proximity to LBB Does Not Prolong the Duration of the Left Ventricular Lateral Wall Depolarization Compared to LBB Pacing.

Authors:  Karol Curila; Pavel Jurak; Kevin Vernooy; Marek Jastrzebski; Petr Waldauf; Frits Prinzen; Josef Halamek; Marketa Susankova; Lucie Znojilova; Radovan Smisek; Jakub Karch; Filip Plesinger; Pawel Moskal; Luuk Heckman; Jan Mizner; Ivo Viscor; Vlastimil Vondra; Pavel Leinveber; Pavel Osmancik
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2021-12-07
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.