Search

Background: Leadless cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an emerging heart failure treatment. An implanted electrode delivers lateral or septal endocardial left ventricular (LV) pacing (LVP) upon detection of a right ventricular (RV) pacing stimulus from a coimplanted device, thus generating biventricular pacing (BiVP). Electrical efficacy data regarding this therapy, particularly leadless LV septal pacing (LVSP) for potential conduction system capture, are limited. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the acute performance of leadless CRT using electrocardiographic imaging (ECGi) and assess the optimal pacing modality (OPM) of LVSP on the basis of RV and LV activation. Methods: Ten WiSE-CRT recipients underwent an ECGi study testing: RV pacing, BiVP, LVP only, and LVP with an optimized atrioventricular delay (LV-OPT). BiV, LV, and RV activation times (shortest time taken to activate 90% of the ventricles [BIVAT-90], shortest time taken to activate 95% of the LV, and shortest time taken to activate 90% of the RV) plus LV and BiV dyssynchrony index (standard deviation of LV activation times and standard deviation of all activation times) were calculated from reconstructed epicardial electrograms. The individual OPM yielding the greatest improvement from baseline was determined. Results: BiVP generated a 23.7% improvement in BiVAT-90 (P = .002). An improvement of 43.3% was observed at the OPM (P = .0001), primarily through reductions in shortest time taken to activate 90% of the RV. At the OPM, BiVAT-90 improved in patients with lateral (43.3%; P = .0001; n = 5) and septal (42.4%; P = .009; n = 5) LV implants. The OPM varied by individual. LVP and LV-OPT were mostly superior in patients with LVSP, and in those with sinus rhythm and left bundle branch block (n = 4). Conclusion: Leadless CRT significantly improves acute ECGi-derived activation and dyssynchrony metrics. Using an individualized OPM improves efficacy in selected patients. Effective LVSP is feasible, with fusion pacing at LV-OPT mitigating the potential deleterious effects on RV activation.

Abstract Background The SelectSecure™ 3830 lead is an innovative, lumenless, and thin active fixed lead with a nonretractable screw-in tip and a diameter of 4.1 Fr, making it the thinnest pacing lead available. Its high anti-extrusion properties and durability have shown favorable outcomes in cardiac pacing, especially in pediatric patients. The superfine design and easy implantation of the lead have rendered it a preferred choice in children, particularly in cases of congenital heart disease. Case presentation This case series presents two infant patients who underwent transvenous endocardial pacing using the SelectSecure™ 3830 lead, along with a comprehensive literature review on the topic. The study followed the patients for 5 years and 3 years, respectively, and observed stable pacing parameters, indicating a positive therapeutic outcome and safety. This article discusses the optimal age and body shape for transvenous lead implantation in infants and highlights the advantages and disadvantages of endocardial and epicardial pacing approaches. Although endocardial pacing offers several benefits such as minimal trauma, short hospital stay, and longer battery life, it may not be suitable for intracardiac shunts, and venous occlusion remains a concern. On the other hand, epicardial pacing may be considered for children with challenging endocardial access but comes with higher risk of lead failure and coronary artery compression. This study emphasizes the importance of careful follow-up in pediatric patients with pacing, as lead failure can occur in young patients owing to growth and development, leading to syncope and battery depletion. The article also underscores the significance of selecting the appropriate pacing location to minimize the impact of cardiac function, with right ventricular septal pacing emerging as a preferable option. Conclusions The SelectSecure™ 3830 lead presents a promising solution for transvenous endocardial pacing in pediatric patients with high degree atrioventricular block and bradycardia, ensuring safe and effective pacing as they grow and develop.

Background: The SelectSecure™ 3830 lead is an innovative, lumenless, and thin active fixed lead with a nonretractable screw-in tip and a diameter of 4.1 Fr, making it the thinnest pacing lead available. Its high anti-extrusion properties and durability have shown favorable outcomes in cardiac pacing, especially in pediatric patients. The superfine design and easy implantation of the lead have rendered it a preferred choice in children, particularly in cases of congenital heart disease. Case presentation: This case series presents two infant patients who underwent transvenous endocardial pacing using the SelectSecure™ 3830 lead, along with a comprehensive literature review on the topic. The study followed the patients for 5 years and 3 years, respectively, and observed stable pacing parameters, indicating a positive therapeutic outcome and safety. This article discusses the optimal age and body shape for transvenous lead implantation in infants and highlights the advantages and disadvantages of endocardial and epicardial pacing approaches. Although endocardial pacing offers several benefits such as minimal trauma, short hospital stay, and longer battery life, it may not be suitable for intracardiac shunts, and venous occlusion remains a concern. On the other hand, epicardial pacing may be considered for children with challenging endocardial access but comes with higher risk of lead failure and coronary artery compression. This study emphasizes the importance of careful follow-up in pediatric patients with pacing, as lead failure can occur in young patients owing to growth and development, leading to syncope and battery depletion. The article also underscores the significance of selecting the appropriate pacing location to minimize the impact of cardiac function, with right ventricular septal pacing emerging as a preferable option. Conclusions: The SelectSecure™ 3830 lead presents a promising solution for transvenous endocardial pacing in pediatric patients with high degree atrioventricular block and bradycardia, ensuring safe and effective pacing as they grow and develop. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biventricular endocardial pacing (BiV-endo) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) are novel methods of delivering cardiac resynchronization therapy. These techniques are associated with improved activation times and acute hemodynamic response compared with conventional biventricular epicardial pacing (BiV-epi); however, the effects on repolarization and arrhythmic risk are unknown. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of temporary BiV-epi, BiV-endo, and LBBAP on epicardial left ventricular (LV) repolarization using electrocardiographic imaging (ECGi). Eleven patients indicated for cardiac resynchronization therapy underwent a temporary pacing protocol with ECGi. BiV-endo was delivered via endocardial stimulation of the LV lateral wall. LBBAP was delivered by pacing the LV septum. Epicardial LV repolarization time (LVRT-95; time taken for 95% of the LV to repolarize), LV RT dispersion, mean LV activation recovery interval (ARI), LV ARI dispersion, and RT gradients were calculated. The protocol was completed in 10 patients. During LBBAP, there were significant reductions in LVRT-95 (94.9 ± 17.4 ms vs 125.0 ± 29.4 ms; P =.03) and LV RT dispersion (29.4 ± 6.3 ms vs 40.8 ± 11.4 ms; P =.015) compared with BiV-epi. In contrast, there were no significant differences between baseline, BiV-epi, or BiV-endo. There was a nonsignificant reduction in mean RT gradients between LBBAP and baseline rhythm (0.74 ± 0.22 ms/mm vs 1.01 ± 0.31 ms/mm; P =.07). There were no significant differences in mean LV ARI or LV ARI dispersion between groups. Temporary LBBAP reduces epicardial dispersion of repolarization compared with conventional BiV-epi. Further study is required to determine whether these repolarization changes on ECGi translate into a reduced risk of ventricular arrhythmia in clinical practice. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The WiSE-CRT System (EBR systems, Sunnyvale, CA) permits leadless left ventricular pacing. Currently, no intraprocedural guidance is used to target optimal electrode placement while simultaneously guiding acoustic transmitter placement in close proximity to the electrode to ensure adequate power delivery. The purpose of this study was to assess the use of computed tomography (CT) anatomy, dynamic perfusion and mechanics, and predicted activation pattern to identify both the optimal electrode and transmitter locations. A novel CT protocol was developed using preprocedural imaging and simulation to identify target segments (TSs) for electrode implantation, with late electrical and mechanical activation, with ≥5 mm wall thickness without perfusion defects. Modeling of the acoustic intensity from different transmitter implantation sites to the TSs was used to identify the optimal transmitter location. During implantation, TSs were overlaid on fluoroscopy to guide optimal electrode location that were evaluated by acute hemodynamic response (AHR) by measuring the maximal rate of left ventricular pressure rise with biventricular pacing. Ten patients underwent the implantation procedure. The transmitter could be implanted within the recommended site on the basis of preprocedural analysis in all patients. CT identified a mean of 4.8 ± 3.5 segments per patient with wall thickness < 5 mm. During electrode implantation, biventricular pacing within TSs resulted in a significant improvement in AHR vs non-TSs (25.5% ± 8.8% vs 12.9% ± 8.6%; P <.001). Pacing in CT-identified scar resulted in either failure to capture or minimal AHR improvement. The electrode was targeted to the TSs in all patients and was implanted in the TSs in 80%. Preprocedural imaging and modeling data with intraprocedural guidance can successfully guide WiSE-CRT electrode and transmitter implantation to allow optimal AHR and adequate power delivery. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Non-responders to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) represent a high-risk, and difficult to treat population of heart failure patients. Studies have shown that these patients have a lower quality of life and reduced life expectancy compared to those who respond to CRT. Whilst the first-line treatment for dyssynchronous heart failure is "conventional" biventricular epicardial CRT, a range of novel pacing interventions have emerged as potential alternatives. This has raised the question whether these new treatments may be useful as a second-line pacing intervention for treating non-responders, or indeed, whether some patients may benefit from these as a first-line option. In this review, we will examine the current evidence for four pacing interventions in the context of treatment of conventional CRT nonresponders: CRT optimization; multisite left ventricular pacing; left ventricular endocardial pacing and conduction system pacing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Non-responders to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) represent a high-risk, and difficult to treat population of heart failure patients. Studies have shown that these patients have a lower quality of life and reduced life expectancy compared to those who respond to CRT. Whilst the first-line treatment for dyssynchronous heart failure is “conventional” biventricular epicardial CRT, a range of novel pacing interventions have emerged as potential alternatives. This has raised the question whether these new treatments may be useful as a second-line pacing intervention for treating non-responders, or indeed, whether some patients may benefit from these as a first-line option. In this review, we will examine the current evidence for four pacing interventions in the context of treatment of conventional CRT non-responders: CRT optimization; multisite left ventricular pacing; left ventricular endocardial pacing and conduction system pacing.

Background: Leadless left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a novel procedure for treatment of patients with dyssynchronous heart failure. Current evidence is limited to observational studies with small patient numbers.Objective: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the safety and efficacy of leadless LV endocardial pacing.Methods: A literature search was conducted through PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Mean differences (MDs) in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) from baseline to 6 months postprocedure were combined using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Cochrane Q test, I2, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis. Funnel plots were constructed to detect publication bias.Results: Five studies with 181 patients were included in the final analysis. Procedural success rate was 90.6%. Clinical response rate was 63%, with mean improvement in NYHA functional class of 0.43 (MD -0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.76 to -0.1; P = .01), with high heterogeneity (P <.001; I2 = 81.1%). There was a mean increase in LVEF of 6.3% (MD 6.3; 95% CI 4.35-8.19; P <.001, with low heterogeneity (P = 0.84; I2 <0.001%). The echocardiographic response rate was 54%. Procedure-related complication and mortality rates were 23.8% and 2.8%, respectively.Conclusion: The efficacy of leadless LV endocardial pacing for CRT supports its use as a second-line therapy in patients in whom standard CRT is not possible or has been ineffective. Improvements in safety profile will facilitate widespread uptake in the treatment of these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Leadless left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) represents the merger of two rapidly progressing areas in the field of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT). It combines the attractive concepts of pacing the native conduction system to allow more physiological activation of the myocardium than conventional biventricular pacing, with the potential added benefits of avoiding long-term complications associated with transvenous leads via leadless left ventricular endocardial pacing. This perspective article will first review the evidence for the efficacy of leadless pacing in CRT. We then summarise the procedural steps and pilot data for leadless LBBAP, followed by a discussion of the safety and efficacy of this novel technique. Finally, we will examine how further mechanistic evidence may shed light to which patients may benefit most from leadless LBBAP, and how improvements in current experience and technology could promote widespread uptake and expand current clinical indications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Leadless left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) represents the merger of two rapidly progressing areas in the field of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT). It combines the attractive concepts of pacing the native conduction system to allow more physiological activation of the myocardium than conventional biventricular pacing, with the potential added benefits of avoiding long-term complications associated with transvenous leads via leadless left ventricular endocardial pacing. This perspective article will first review the evidence for the efficacy of leadless pacing in CRT. We then summarise the procedural steps and pilot data for leadless LBBAP, followed by a discussion of the safety and efficacy of this novel technique. Finally, we will examine how further mechanistic evidence may shed light to which patients may benefit most from leadless LBBAP, and how improvements in current experience and technology could promote widespread uptake and expand current clinical indications.

BackgroundLeadless endocardial left ventricular (LV) pacing resynchronization therapy is a novel solution for patients with heart failure (HF) in whom conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) failed.MethodsPubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant cohort studies. Clinical outcomes of interest such as ejection fraction (EF), QRS duration (QRSd), and left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) were extracted and analyzed.ResultsFive studies involving 175 HF patients for WiSE CRT were included, and patients were followed-up for 6 months. The implanted success rate ranged from 76.5 to 100%. WiSE CRT resulted in significantly narrower QRSd [mean difference (MD): −38.21 ms, 95% confidence interval (CI): −44.36 to −32.07, p < 0.001], improved left ventricular ejection fraction (MD: 6.07%, 95% CI: 4.43 to 7.71, I2 = 0%, p < 0.001), reduced left ventricular end-systolic volume (MD: −23.47 ml, 95% CI: −37.18 to −9.13, p < 0.001), and reduced left ventricular end-diastolic volume (MD: −24.02 ml, 95% CI: −37.01 to −11.03, p = 0.02).ConclusionEvidence from current studies suggests that leadless endocardial LV pacing resynchronization is effective for HF patients who failed conventional CRT or needed a device upgrade, and it may be an interesting rescue therapy.

Background: Leadless left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing is an emerging cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) technology. Predictors of response to leadless CRT are poorly understood. Implanting the LV endocardial pacing electrode in sites with increased electrical latency (Q-LV) may improve response rates., Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine the association between Q-LV and echocardiographic remodeling response to leadless CRT delivered with the WiSE-CRT system., Methods: A post hoc analysis (n = 122) of the SOLVE-CRT trial examined the relationship between LV pacing site Q-LV with rate of left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) reduction >15% at 6 months. Multivariable regression analysis, adjusting for age, sex, previous CRT nonresponse, cardiomyopathy etiology, QRS morphology, and QRS duration was performed, followed by receiver operating characteristic analysis and analysis of variance by Q-LV quartile. A subgroup analysis of the ischemic cardiomyopathy cohort was undertaken., Results: Complete Q-LV data were available for 122 of 153 patients (80%) in the active arms SOLVE-CRT. Overall, the 6-month LVESV response rate was 46%. Logistic regression identified Q-LV as an independent response predictor with borderline significance (adjusted odds ratio 1.015; P = .05). Analysis by Q-LV quartile demonstrated a significant improvement in response rate in quartile 4 (longest Q-LV 64%) compared to quartile 1 (shortest Q-LV 28%) (P <.01). This association was primarily driven by strong Q-LV-response correlation in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, demonstrated by subgroup logistic regression (adjusted odds ratio 1.034; P = .004)., Conclusion: Increased Q-LV was associated with improved reverse remodeling following leadless CRT. Targeting LV endocardial sites of high Q-LV may deliver additional benefit compared to empirical LV electrode implantation., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Sanders has served on the advisory board of Medtronic, Abbott, Boston-Scientific, Pacemate, and CathRx; reports that the University of Adelaide has received on his behalf lecture and/or consulting fees from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Abbott; and reports that the University of Adelaide has received on his behalf research funding from Medtronic, Abbott, Boston Scientific, and Microport CRM. Dr Singh has received consulting fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Biosense Webster, Cardiologs Inc, CVRx Inc, EBR Systems, Implicity Inc, Impulse Dynamics, Rhythm Management Group, Medtronic, Sanofi, and WebMD; has received honoraria from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Biosense Webster, CVRx Inc, Impulse Dynamics, Medtronic, Sanofi, and WebMD; and has served on the Board of Trustees of the Heart Rhythm Society (unpaid). Dr Rinaldi receives research funding and/or consultation fees from Abbott, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Spectranetics, EBR Systems, and MicroPort. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Leadless cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an emerging heart failure treatment. An implanted electrode delivers lateral or septal endocardial left ventricular (LV) pacing (LVP) upon detection of a right ventricular (RV) pacing stimulus from a coimplanted device, thus generating biventricular pacing (BiVP). Electrical efficacy data regarding this therapy, particularly leadless LV septal pacing (LVSP) for potential conduction system capture, are limited., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the acute performance of leadless CRT using electrocardiographic imaging (ECGi) and assess the optimal pacing modality (OPM) of LVSP on the basis of RV and LV activation., Methods: Ten WiSE-CRT recipients underwent an ECGi study testing: RV pacing, BiVP, LVP only, and LVP with an optimized atrioventricular delay (LV-OPT). BiV, LV, and RV activation times (shortest time taken to activate 90% of the ventricles [BIVAT-90], shortest time taken to activate 95% of the LV, and shortest time taken to activate 90% of the RV) plus LV and BiV dyssynchrony index (standard deviation of LV activation times and standard deviation of all activation times) were calculated from reconstructed epicardial electrograms. The individual OPM yielding the greatest improvement from baseline was determined., Results: BiVP generated a 23.7% improvement in BiVAT-90 ( P  = .002). An improvement of 43.3% was observed at the OPM ( P = .0001), primarily through reductions in shortest time taken to activate 90% of the RV. At the OPM, BiVAT-90 improved in patients with lateral (43.3%; P = .0001; n = 5) and septal (42.4%; P = .009; n = 5) LV implants. The OPM varied by individual. LVP and LV-OPT were mostly superior in patients with LVSP, and in those with sinus rhythm and left bundle branch block (n = 4)., Conclusion: Leadless CRT significantly improves acute ECGi-derived activation and dyssynchrony metrics. Using an individualized OPM improves efficacy in selected patients. Effective LVSP is feasible, with fusion pacing at LV-OPT mitigating the potential deleterious effects on RV activation., (© 2024 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a novel form of conduction system pacing which can reverse left bundle branch block and deliver cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The WiSE-CRT system delivers leadless endocardial pacing with symptomatic and left ventricular (LV) remodelling improvements following intervention. We report the technical feasibility of delivering leadless LBBAP using the WiSE-CRT system. Case summary In Case 1, a 57-year-old male with ischaemic cardiomyopathy and complete heart block underwent implantation of the WiSE-CRT system, using a retrograde transaortic approach, after failed conventional CRT. Temporary left bundle stimulation from the LV septum achieved superior electrical resynchronization and equivalent haemodynamic response compared to endocardial pacing at the lateral LV wall. In Case 2, an 82-year-old gentleman with tachyarrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy underwent WiSE-CRT implantation via a trans-septal inter-atrial approach, with the endocardial electrode successfully deployed in the LV septum. Discussion Here we report the first case of deployment of the WiSE-CRT endocardial electrode in the LV septum and demonstrate the technical feasibility of leadless LBBAP. Entirely leadless CRT is an attractive option for patients with venous access issues or recurrent lead complications and has previously been successful using the WiSE-CRT system and a leadless pacemaker in the right ventricle. Further studies are required to assess long-term efficacy and safety of leadless LBBAP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) upgrades may be less likely to improve following intervention. Leadless left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing has been used for patients with previously failed CRT or high-risk upgrades. We compared procedural and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing coronary sinus (CS) CRT upgrades with high-risk and previously failed CRT upgrades undergoing LV endocardial upgrades.Method and Results: Prospective consecutive CS upgrades between 2015 and 2019 were compared with those undergoing WiSE-CRT implantation. Cardiac resynchronization therapy response at 6 months was defined as improvement in clinical composite score (CCS) and a reduction in LV end-systolic volume (LVESV) ≥15%. A total of 225 patients were analysed; 121 CS and 104 endocardial upgrades. Patients receiving WiSE-CRT tended to have more comorbidities and were more likely to have previous cardiac surgery (30.9% vs. 16.5%; P = 0.012), hypertension (59.2% vs. 34.7%; P < 0.001), chronic obstructive airways disease (19.4% vs. 9.9%; P = 0.046), and chronic kidney disease (46.4% vs. 21.5%; P < 0.01) but similar LV ejection fraction (30.0 ± 8.3% vs. 29.5 ± 8.6%; P = 0.678). WiSE-CRT upgrades were successful in 97.1% with procedure-related mortality in 1.9%. Coronary sinus upgrades were successful in 97.5% of cases with a 2.5% rate of CS dissection and 5.6% lead malfunction/displacement. At 6 months, 91 WiSE-CRT upgrades and 107 CS upgrades had similar improvements in CCS (76.3% vs. 68.5%; P = 0.210) and reduction in LVESV ≥15% (54.2% vs. 56.3%; P = 0.835).Conclusion: Despite prior failed upgrades and high-risk patients with more comorbidities, WiSE-CRT upgrades had high rates of procedural success and similar improvements in CCS and LV remodelling with CS upgrades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Permanent pacemakers are widely used in the pediatric population due to congenital and surgically acquired rhythm disturbances. The diversity and complexity of congenital heart diseases make device management a highly individualized procedure in pediatric pacing. We are also faced with special problems in pediatric age group as growth, children's activity and infection susceptibility. This study aimed to present our institute's experience in pediatric and adolescent pacemaker implantation and long-term outcomes. Methods: This cross-sectional observational study included 100 pediatric patients who visited our outpatient clinics at Ain Shams University Hospitals for regular follow up of their previously implanted permanent pacemakers. All patients were subjected to history taking, clinical examination, ECG recording, echocardiography and elaborate device programming. Data about device types, device components' longevity, subsequent procedures, complications were collected, with comparison between epicardial and endocardial pacemakers. Results: Our study population ranged in age from 8 months to 18 years (mean 13.12 ± 5.04 years), 51 were males and 53 patients had congenital heart disease. Epicardial pacing represented 26% of our total population using only VVIR pacemakers, while endocardial pacing represented 74% of our population with 58.1% of them being VVIR pacemakers. First battery longevity was higher in endocardial batteries (108 months vs. 60 months, p value: 0.007). First lead longevity was also higher in endocardial leads (105 moths vs. 58 months, p value: 0.006). Complication rate was 25%; 8 patients had early complications (one insulation break in endocardial group). Late complications occurred in 17 patients (10 patients had lead fracture; 9 of them were endocardial, 2 insulation breaks in endocardial leads, 3 patients from epicardial group had lead failure of capture). In total, 16 patients had lead-related complications. There was no statistically significant difference between different lead models regarding lead-related complications. Conclusion: Pacemakers in children are generally safe, but still having high rates of lead-related complications. Lead failure of capture was more common in epicardial leads. These complications had no relation to the model of the leads. Endocardial pacemakers showed higher first lead and first battery longevity compared to epicardial pacemakers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Endocardial pacing may be beneficial in patients who fail to improve following conventional epicardial cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The potential to pace anywhere inside the left ventricle thus avoiding myocardial scar and targeting the latest activating segments may be particularly important. The WiSE‐CRT system (EBR systems, Sunnyvale, CA) reliably produces wireless, endocardial left ventricular (LV) pacing. The purpose of this analysis was to determine whether this system improved symptoms or led to LV remodeling in patients who were nonresponders to conventional CRT. Method: An international, multicenter registry of patients who were nonresponders to conventional CRT and underwent implantation with the WiSE‐CRT system was collected. Results: Twenty‐two patients were included; 20 patients underwent successful implantation with confirmation of endocardial biventricular pacing and in 2 patients, there was a failure of electrode capture. Eighteen patients proceeded to 6‐month follow‐up; endocardial pacing resulted in a significant reduction in QRS duration compared with intrinsic QRS duration (26.6 ± 24.4 ms; P =.002) and improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (4.7 ± 7.9%; P =.021). The mean reduction in left ventricular end‐diastolic volume was 8.3 ± 42.3 cm3 (P =.458) and left ventricular end‐systolic volume (LVESV) was 13.1 ± 44.3 cm3 (P =.271), which were statistically nonsignificant. Overall, 55.6% of patients had improvement in their clinical composite score and 66.7% had a reduction in LVESV ≥15% and/or absolute improvement in LVEF ≥5%. Conclusion: Nonresponders to conventional CRT have few remaining treatment options. We have shown in this high‐risk patient group that the WiSE‐CRT system results in improvement in their clinical composite scores and leads to LV remodeling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Biventricular endocardial pacing (BiV ENDO) is a therapy for heart failure patients who cannot receive transvenous epicardial cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) or have not responded adequately to CRT. BiV ENDO CRT can be delivered by a new wireless LV ENDO pacing system (WiSE-CRT system; EBR Systems, Sunnyvale, CA), without the requirement for lifelong anticoagulation.Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of the WiSE-CRT system during real-world clinical use in an international registry.Methods: Data were prospectively collected from 14 centers implanting the WiSE-CRT system as part of the WiCS-LV Post Market Surveillance Registry. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02610673).Results: Ninety patients from 14 European centers underwent implantation with the WiSE-CRT system. Patients were predominantly male, age 68.2 ± 10.5 years, left ventricular ejection fraction 30.6% ± 8.9%, mean QRS duration 180.7 ± 27.0 ms, and 40% with ischemic etiology. Successful implantation and delivery of BiV ENDO pacing was achieved in 94.4% of patients. Acute (<24 hours), 1- to 30-day, and 1- to 6-month complications rates were 4.4%, 18.8%, and 6.7%, respectively. Five deaths (5.6%) occurred within 6 months (3 procedure related). Seventy percent of patients had improvement in heart failure symptoms.Conclusion: BiV ENDO pacing with the WiSE-CRT system seems to be technically feasible, with a high success rate. Three procedural deaths occurred during the study. Procedural complications mandate adequate operator training and implantation at centers with immediately available cardiothoracic and vascular surgical support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To evaluate pacing system survival and complications to pacemaker (PM) therapy in children with isolated complete atrioventricular block (CAVB).Methods and Results: We performed a nationwide retrospective study of children diagnosed before 15 years of age with isolated CAVB and PM treatment. Between 1983 and 2012, 127 patients underwent PM-implantations at 3.2 (0-17) [median (range)] years and were followed for 11 (0.6-19) years. An endocardial or epicardial PM system was implanted in 72 and 55 patients, respectively. A total of 306 pacing leads (76% steroid-eluting) were implanted. Pacing system survival was significantly affected by age, with a higher risk of a new intervention for children aged <1 month at first implantation. Lead survival of the steroid-eluting leads at 5 and 10 years was 90 and 81%, respectively, with no difference between epicardial and endocardial systems. Complications leading to revision of the pacing system occurred in 24% of the patients. Patients aged <1 month at first PM implantation had a five-fold increased risk for a complication to occur. Dividing the cohort according to year of first procedure showed that those who had their first implantation ≥2002 had fewer complications and also lead- and pacing system survival was better in the later cohort.Conclusion: Pacing system survival and complications to PM therapy in young patients with isolated CAVB were significantly affected by age, with low age at PM implantation constituting a risk factor. Endocardial and epicardial pacing systems showed no significant differences in performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heart failure is a complex clinical syndrome associated with a significant morbidity and mortality burden. Reductions in left ventricular (LV) function trigger adaptive mechanisms, leading to structural changes within the LV and the potential development of dyssynchronous ventricular activation. This is the substrate targeted during cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT); however, around 30-50% of patients do not experience benefit from this treatment. Non-response occurs as a result of pre-implant, peri-implant and post implant factors but the technical constraints of traditional, transvenous epicardial CRT mean they can be challenging to overcome. In an effort to improve response, novel alternative methods of CRT delivery have been developed and of these endocardial pacing, where the LV is stimulated from inside the LV cavity, appears the most promising. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: A significant number of patients undergo upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). These patients tend to differ from individuals undergoing de novo CRT implantations both in terms of their baseline demographics and the etiology underlying their heart failure. Areas covered: There are several factors that need to be considered when upgrading patients to CRT, such as, venous patency. Potentially, these conditions can cause issues which may result in procedures being more difficult than de novo implantations. This article discusses these issues and compares the rates of procedural-related complications for CRT upgrades and de novo implantations. It discusses the proportion of patients that are likely to respond to CRT with each intervention. Expert commentary: Understanding the relative risks of CRT upgrades versus de novo implantations is important to help operators select the correct initial device and counsel patients accordingly. Growing experience with image-guided implantations and endocardial pacing may prove to be particularly relevant to patients undergoing CRT upgrades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Pacing from the left ventricular (LV) endocardium might increase the likelihood of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy. However, experimental and clinical data supporting this assumption are limited and controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the acute response of biventricular pacing from the LV epicardium and endocardium in a swine non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) model of dyssynchrony.Methods and results: A NICM was induced in six swine by 3 weeks of rapid ventricular pacing. Biventricular stimulation was performed from 16 paired locations in the LV (8 epicardial and 8 endocardial) with two different atrioventricular (80 and 110 ms) intervals and three interventricular (0, +30, -30 ms) delays. The acute response of the aortic blood flow, LV and right ventricular (RV) pressures, LVdP/dtmax and LVdP/dtmin and QRS complex width and QT duration induced by biventricular stimulation were analysed. The haemodynamic and electrical beneficial responses to either LV endocardial or epicardial biventricular pacing were similar (ΔLVdP/dtmax: +7.8 ± 2.2% ENDO vs. +7.3 ± 1.5% EPI, and ΔQRS width: -16.8 ± 1.3% ENDO vs. -17.1 ± 1.9% EPI; P = ns). Pacing from LV basal regions either from the epicardium or endocardium produced better haemodynamic responses as compared with mid or apical LV regions (P < 0.05). The LV regions producing the maximum QRS complex shortening did not correspond to those inducing the best haemodynamic responses (EPI: r2 = 0.013, P = ns; ENDO: r2 = 0.002, P = ns).Conclusion: Endocardial LV pacing induced similar haemodynamic changes than pacing from the epicardium. The response to endocardial LV pacing is region dependent as observed in epicardial pacing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Endocardial left ventricular (LV) pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy has been proposed as an alternative to conventional LV lead placement via the coronary sinus. In order to assess the relative benefits and risks of this technique, we have performed a meta-analysis of published reports.Methods and results: A systemic search was performed using online databases to identify studies of lead-based endocardial pacing. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed, to assess the rate of complications and clinical response (defined as ≥1 decrease in NYHA class). We selected 23 studies, including 384 patients. The trans-atrial septal technique was used in 20 studies, 1 used the trans-ventricular apical technique, and 2 used the trans-ventricular septal technique. Mean age was 66 years, male 66%, EF 26%, NYHA class 3.0. Procedural success rates were over 95% in all studies. Clinical response was reported by 16 studies for 262 patients, giving a response estimate of 82% (95% CI 71-89%). There was significant heterogeneity, and response in the only large study was 59%. Thromboembolic (TE) complications were reported by all studies, over 22 ±32 months follow up. The rate of stroke was 2.5 events per 100 patient years (95% CI 1.5-4.3), and TIA 2.6 (1.1-6.1). The mortality rate was 4.5 (1.5-13.6) per 100 patient years.Conclusion: LV endocardial pacing appears to be a viable technique when conventional lead placement is not possible. Response rates were heterogeneous but comparable with conventional CRT. There is likely to be a small increase over expected rates of stroke, although included patients were high risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An alternate site pacing is preferred over a standard right ventricular (RV) transvenous endocardial pacing in a patient with prosthetic tricuspid valve, as later may result in valve or pacing lead malfunction. We hereby report a female who had favorable 5-years outcome following endocardial RV pacing through a prosthetic tricuspid valve.

Background: Dual-site right ventricular pacing (Dual RV) has been proposed as an alternative for patients with heart failure undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with a failure to deliver a coronary sinus (CS) lead. Only short-term hemodynamic and echocardiographic results of Dual RV are available. We aimed to assess the long-term results of Dual RV and its impact on survival. Methods: Multicenter retrospective assessment of all CRT implants during a 12-year period. Patients with failed CS lead implantation, treated with Dual RV, were followed and assessed for the primary endpoint of all-cause mortality and/or heart transplant. A control group was obtained from contemporary patients using propensity matching for all available baseline variables. Results: Ninety-three patients were implanted with Dual RV devices and compared with 93 matched controls. During a median of 1,273 days (interquartile range 557-2,218), intention-totreat analysis showed that all-cause mortality and/or heart transplant was higher in the Dual RV group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-2.47, P = 0.012). Astreated analysis yielded similar results (HR = 1.97, 95% CI 1.31-2.96, P = 0.001). Cardiac devicerelated infections occurred seven times more frequently in the DualRVsite group (HR=7.60,95% CI 1.51-38.33, P=0.014). Among DualRVnonresponders, four had their apical leads switched off, five required an epicardial LVlead insertion, a transseptal LVlead was implanted in two, and in nine patients, after reviewing the CS venogram, a new CS lead insertion was successfully attempted. Conclusion: Dual RV pacing is associated with worse clinical outcomes and higher complication rates than conventional CRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Evaluation of long-term outcome of transvenous pacemaker (PM) implantation in infants.Methods and Results: A retrospective analysis of all transvenous PM implantations in infants <10 kg between September 1997 and October 2001 was made. Indications for PM implantation, age at implantation, and determinants of long-term outcome including cardiac function, PM function, and PM (system) complications were noted. Seven patients underwent transvenous VVI(R) PM implantation. Median age at implantation was 3 days (range: 1 day to 14 months), median weight 3.5 kg (range: 2.3-8.7 kg), and median follow-up 14 years (range: 12.3-16.3 years). Pacemaker indications were congenital complete atrioventricular block (n = 4), long QT syndrome with heart block (n = 2), and post-operative complete atrioventricular block with sinus node dysfunction (n = 1). No procedural complications were noted. Today all patients are alive and symptom free with good PM and cardiac function. Two patients underwent PM generator relocation for imminent skin necrosis and skin traction. Two patients suffered from asymptomatic left subclavian vein occlusion and developed thrombosis on the PM electrode. Three patients were converted to an epicardial PM system, due to atrial perforation after upgrading procedure (n = 1), syncope with need for implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation (n = 1), and systolic dysfunction with development of dilated cardiomyopathy, which normalized under cardiac resynchronization therapy pacing (n = 1). Two patients needed atrioventricular (AV) valve repair for severe insufficiency. Two patients underwent repositioning of dysfunctional PM leads. In five patients, transvenous leads were removed. Indications were elective lead replacement (n = 1), atrial perforation (n = 1), and switch to an epicardial system (n = 3).Conclusion: Transvenous PM implantation in infants (<10 kg) is associated with a high incidence of vascular occlusion, thrombosis, and severe atrioventricular valve regurgitation during long-term follow-up. We advocate an epicardial approach for PM implantation in small children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The increase in global coronary flow seen with conventional biventricular pacing is mediated by an increase in the dominant backward expansion wave (BEW). Little is known about the determinants of flow in the left‐sided epicardial coronary arteries beyond this or the effect of endocardial pacing stimulation on coronary physiology. Methods and Results Eleven patients with a chronically implanted biventricular pacemaker underwent an acute hemodynamic and electrophysiological study. Five of 11 patients also took part in a left ventricular endocardial pacing protocol at the same time. Conventional biventricular pacing, delivered epicardially from the coronary sinus, resulted in a 9% increase in flow (average peak velocity) in the left anterior descending artery (LAD), mediated by a 13% increase in the area under the BEW (P=0.004). Endocardial pacing resulted in a 27% increase in LAD flow, mediated by a 112% increase in the area under the forward compression wave (FCW) and a 43% increase in the area under the BEW (P=0.048 and P=0.036, respectively). There were no significant changes in circumflex parameters. Conventional biventricular pacing resulted in homogenization of timing of coronary flow compared with baseline (mean difference in time to peak in the LAD versus circumflex artery: FCW 39 ms [baseline] versus 3 ms [conventional biventricular pacing], P=0.008; BEW 47 ms [baseline] versus 8 ms [conventional biventricular pacing], P=0.004). Conclusions Epicardial and endocardial pacing result in increased coronary flow in the left anterior descending artery and homogenization of the timing of waves that determine flow in the LAD and the circumflex artery. The increase in both the FCW and the BEW with endocardial pacing may be the result of a more physiological activation pattern than that of epicardial pacing, which resulted in an increase of only the BEW.

Background: Permanent pacing in pediatric population has been growing in Egypt. The aim of this study is to present one center experience in pediatric pacing including implantation procedures and long-term outcome. Methods and results: During the period from 1996 to 2010, we collected the data of 32 children (18 males) with a mean age of 5.7 ± 3.8 years that underwent permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation. Their mean weight was 21.6 ± 13.8 kg, and median body surface area (BSA) was 0.7 m2. Twenty-five patients (78.1%) had congenital heart disease (CHD). Pacing was done via subclavian vein puncture while epicardial pacing was done via standard surgical techniques. All patients were followed up for 0.25–14 years (median: 2.5 years). Suboptimal pacing parameters were defined by one or more of the following: R/P wave malsensing, pacing threshold >2 V, or battery longevity of 0.05). Conclusion: Permanent pacing in pediatric age group is relatively safe. However, there is substantial higher incidence of suboptimal pacing parameters and pacing system failures especially in younger and smaller children. Epicardial steroid eluting leads are comparable to endocardial steroid eluting leads in performance.

Background Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular epicardial (BV-CS) or endocardial left ventricular (LV) stimulation (BV-EN) improves LV hemodynamics. The effect of CRT on right ventricular function is less clear, particularly for BV-EN. Our objective was to compare the simultaneous acute hemodynamic response (AHR) of the right and left ventricles (RV and LV) with BV-CS and BV-EN in order to determine the optimal mode of CRT delivery. Methods Nine patients with previously implanted CRT devices successfully underwent a temporary pacing study. Pressure wires measured the simultaneous AHR in both ventricles during different pacing protocols. Conventional epicardial CRT was delivered in LV-only (LV-CS) and BV-CS configurations and compared with BV-EN pacing in multiple locations using a roving decapolar catheter. Results Best BV-EN (optimal AHR of all LV endocardial pacing sites) produced a significantly greater RV AHR compared with LV-CS and BV-CS pacing (P < 0.05). RV AHR had a significantly increased standard deviation compared to LV AHR (P < 0.05) with a weak correlation between RV and LV AHR (Spearman rs = −0.06). Compromised biventricular optimization, whereby RV AHR was increased at the expense of a smaller decrease in LV AHR, was achieved in 56% of cases, all with BV-EN pacing. Conclusions BV-EN pacing produces significant increases in both LV and RV AHR, above that achievable with conventional epicardial pacing. RV AHR cannot be used as a surrogate for optimizing LV AHR; however, compromised biventricular optimization is possible. The beneficial effect of endocardial LV pacing on RV function may have important clinical benefits beyond conventional CRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Transvenous pacemaker lead implantation is the preferred method of pacing in adult patients. Lead performance and longevity are superior and the implantation approach can be performed under local anaesthetic with a very low morbidity. In children, and especially in neonates and infants, the epicardial route was traditionally chosen until the advent of smaller generators and lead implantation techniques that allowed growth of the child without lead displacement. Endocardial implantation is not universally accepted, however, as there is an incidence of venous occlusion of the smaller veins of neonates and infants with concerns for loss of venous access in the future. Growing experience with lower profile leads, however, reveals that endocardial pacing too can be performed with low morbidity and good long-term results in neonates and infants.

Background Only a few studies on the cephalic vein cutdown technique for pacemaker lead implantation in children weighing ≤10 kg have been reported even though the procedure is widely accepted in adults. Objective The purpose of this study was to prove that cephalic vein cutdown for pacemaker lead implantation is a reliable technique with a low incidence of complications in children weighing ≤10 kg. Methods The study included 44 children weighing ≤10 kg with an endocardial pacemaker. Cephalic, subclavian, and axillary vein diameters were measured by ultrasound before implantation. The measured diameters were used to select either an endocardial or epicardial surgical technique. Regular 6-month follow-up visits included pacemaker interrogation and clinical and ultrasound examinations. Results Two dual-chamber and 42 single-chamber pacemakers were implanted. Mean weight at implantation was 6.24 kg (range 2.25–10.40 kg), and mean age was 11.4 months (range 1 day–47 months). In 40 children (90.1%), the ventricular leads were implanted using the cephalic vein cutdown technique, and implantation was accomplished via the prepared right external jugular vein in 4 of the children (9.9%). The atrial leads were implanted using axillary vein puncture and external jugular vein preparations. Mean follow-up was 8.9 years (range 0–20.9 years). Only 1 pacemaker-related complication was detected (a lead fracture near the connector that was successfully resolved using a lead repair kit). Conclusion The cephalic vein cutdown technique is feasible and reliable in children weighing ≤10 kg, which justifies the application of additional surgical effort in the treatment of these small patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biventricular endocardial (BIV-endo) pacing and left bundle pacing (LBP) are novel delivery methods for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Both pacing methods can be delivered through leadless pacing, to avoid risks associated with endocardial or transvenous leads. We used computational modelling to quantify synchrony induced by BIV-endo pacing and LBP through a leadless pacing system, and to investigate how the right-left ventricle (RV-LV) delay, RV lead location and type of left bundle capture affect response. We simulated ventricular activation on twenty-four four-chamber heart meshes inclusive of His-Purkinje networks with left bundle branch block (LBBB). Leadless biventricular (BIV) pacing was simulated by adding an RV apical stimulus and an LV lateral wall stimulus (BIV-endo lateral) or targeting the left bundle (BIV-LBP), with an RV-LV delay set to 5 ms. To test effect of prolonged RV-LV delays and RV pacing location, the RV-LV delay was increased to 35 ms and/or the RV stimulus was moved to the RV septum. BIV-endo lateral pacing was less sensitive to increased RV-LV delays, while RV septal pacing worsened response compared to RV apical pacing, especially for long RV-LV delays. To investigate how left bundle capture affects response, we computed 90% BIV activation times (BIVAT-90) during BIV-LBP with selective and non-selective capture, and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), simulated by pacing 1 cm below the left bundle. Non-selective LBP was comparable to selective LBP. LBBAP was worse than selective LBP (BIVAT-90: 54.2 ± 5.7 ms vs. 62.7 ± 6.5, p < 0.01), but it still significantly reduced activation times from baseline. Finally, we compared leadless LBP with RV pacing against optimal LBP delivery through a standard lead system by simulating BIV-LBP and selective LBP alone with and without optimized atrioventricular delay (AVD). Although LBP alone with optimized AVD was better than BIV-LBP, when AVD optimization was not possible BIV-LBP outperformed LBP alone, because the RV pacing stimulus shortened RV activation (BIVAT-90: 54.2 ± 5.7 ms vs. 66.9 ± 5.1 ms, p < 0.01). BIV-endo lateral pacing or LBP delivered through a leadless system could potentially become an alternative to standard CRT. RV-LV delay, RV lead location and type of left bundle capture affect leadless pacing efficacy and should be considered in future trial designs., Competing Interests: AN is employed by NumeriCor GmbH, Graz, Austria. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial of financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Strocchi, Wijesuriya, Elliott, Gillette, Neic, Mehta, Vigmond, Plank, Rinaldi and Niederer.)

Electrical Impact of the Left Ventricular Pacing Site in CRT Introduction Recent studies have demonstrated that left ventricular (LV) pacing site is a critical parameter in optimizing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The present study evaluates the effect of pacing from different LV locations on QRS duration (QRSd) and their relationship to acute hemodynamic response in congestive heart failure patients. Methods and Results Thirty-five patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and left bundle branch block referred for CRT device implantation were studied. Eleven predetermined LV pacing sites were systematically assessed in random order: epicardial: coronary sinus (CS); endocardial: basal and mid-cavity (septal, anterior, lateral, and inferior), apex, and the endocardial site facing the CS pacing site. For each patient QRSd and +dP/dtmax during baseline (AAI) and DDD LV pacing at 2 atrioventricular delays were compared. Response to CRT was significantly better in patients with wider baseline QRSd (≥150 milliseconds). Hemodynamic response was inversely correlated to increase of QRSd during LV pacing (short atrioventricular [AV] delay: r = 0.44, P < 0.001; long AV delay: r = 0.59, P < 0.001). Compared to baseline, LV pacing at the site of shortest QRSd significantly improved +dP/dtmax (+18 ± 25%, P < 0.001) but was not superior to other conventional strategy (lateral wall, CS pacing, and echo-guided) and was inferior to a hemodynamically guided strategy. Conclusions In our study, we have demonstrated that changes of QRSd during LV pacing correlated with acute hemodynamic response and that LV pacing location was a primary determinant of paced QRSd. Although QRSd did not predict the maximum hemodynamic response, our results confirm the link between electrical activation and hemodynamic response of the LV during CRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Cardiac pacing is a difficult technique in children, particularly in patients with congenital heart defects (CHDs). Few studies to date have addressed this topic. Methods and results We performed a retrospective analysis of the results of a single centre. Between 1982 and 2008, 287 patients with CHD, median age of 5 years (25–75%, 1–11) underwent cardiac pacing for sinus node dysfunction (SND) and atrioventricular block (AVB); 97% of patients underwent at least one heart surgery. Endocardial systems (Endo) were implanted in 117 patients, epicardial systems (Epi) in 170, with 595 leads (228 Endo, 367 Epi). Endocardial systems showed a significantly older age group with more frequent SND; Epi a younger age group, with more frequent AVB, greater number of surgical interventions. Perioperative complications were mortality 0.6% (Epi), pericardial effusion 0.6% (Epi), and haemothorax 3.4% (Endo). The median follow-up is 5 (2–10) years: the pacing system failed in 29% of patients, 13% Endo, and 40% Epi (P < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis showed a significantly higher risk of failure for Epi, a lower implant age, greater the number of leads implanted. The risk of malfunction of the leads increases significantly for Epi and the younger age when implanted. The steroid-eluting leads have a lower risk of malfunction (P = 0.05), steroid-eluting Endo leads provide significantly better outcomes than Epi. Conclusion Cardiac pacing in paediatric patients with CHD shows satisfactory results in the long term. Endocardial systems show significantly better results than Epi systems. A younger age when implanted is a risk factor for complications at follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Aims: Limitations imposed by the coronary sinus venous anatomy triggered the transseptal approach for endocardial LV lead placement. The alignment of the interatrial septum (IAS) and its neighborhood anatomy does not favor transseptal puncture from the pre-pectoral area. Locating and advancing a pre-pectoral LV lead delivery catheter (PDC) through an opening created in the IAS via femoral transseptal puncture (FTP) is time consuming and technically difficult. We describe a method where the PDC is snare coupled to the femoral transseptal apparatus (FTA). When the FTA is advanced into the left atrium (LA) the coupled PDC follows. Methods: The catheter of a 25-mm loop snare kit is replaced with the PDC (SelectSite®). The snare loop is positioned in the right common iliac vein from the pre-pectoral access. The PDC is coupled to the FTA by advancing the transseptal apparatus through the open snare loop. After conventional FTP, the FTA is withdrawn back into the right atrium (RA) over an extra support wire positioned in the LA. The PDC with open snare loop is pulled over the FTA up to the RA. The PDC is advanced to close the snare loop on the extra support wire immediately distal to the tip of the dilator close to the puncture site. The PDC is deflected to align with the FTA. The snare coupled catheters are gently advanced across the IAS into the LA. The PDC is released from the FTA by advancing the snare and opening the loop; the snare is then removed from the PDC. The PDC is deflected and advanced into the left ventricle (LV). After positioning the 4.1 Fr lumen less LV lead, the PDC is sliced and removed. Results: The PDC snare coupled to the FTA was advanced into the LA in all five patients, however, access was lost during catheter manipulation in the one right-sided case. Endocardial LV lead was successfully positioned in all five patients. Conclusion: Snare coupling the pre-pectoral SelectSite® catheter to the FTA is technically simple, reliable and a safe method for transseptal endocardial LV lead placement for left pre-pectoral implantation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a proven treatment for heart failure and requires the implantation of a left ventricular (LV) lead, usually placed in a tributary of the coronary sinus. Encouraged by the fact that approximately 30 % of the patients receiving CRT do not benefit from this therapy, LV endocardial pacing has been proposed as an alternative to traditional LV transvenous epicardial pacing. Endocardial LV pacing has a number of potential advantages over conventional LV epicardial pacing, including a more physiological endocardial-to-epicardial transmural activation sequence, a faster ventricular activation, a larger choice of stimulation sites and a potential superior hemodynamic performance. On the other hand, cardiologists will have to deal with new implant techniques' (transseptal), higher risk of thromboembolic events, and challenging extraction procedures of infected material. The future of endocardial stimulation will depend on the results of randomized studies adequately powered to assess the feasibility, the safety and the effectiveness of this new pacing strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]