Standard Defibrillator Leads for Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing: First-in-Man Experience and Short-Term Follow-Up.

The authors report for the first time to their knowledge, implantation of a standard implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead for permanent delivery of left bundle branch area pacing. Implantation was successful and safe in 11 of 12 patients, with adequate defibrillation testing, good electrical and electrocardiographic parameters, and uneventful device-related short-term follow-up.

Mortality after cardiac resynchronization therapy or right ventricular pacing in transcatheter aortic valve replacement recipients.

BACKGROUND: Permanent pacemaker implantation (PMI) is associated with increased morbidity after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Cardiac resynchronization-therapy (CRT) is recommended for patients if left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is ≤ 40% and ventricular pacing is expected in favor to sole right ventricular (RV) pacing. Meanwhile, LVEF may recover after TAVR in patients with aortic valve disease and the benefit of CRT is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the impact of CRT implantation as compared to RV pacing after TAVR. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2022, 4385 patients (53.1% female, mean age 81 ± 6 years) without prior PMI undergoing TAVR were retrospectively identified in our institutional registry. After stratification of patients in LVEF ≤ 40%, 41-49% and ≥ 50%, Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed significantly different survival rates in each subgroup at 5 years (37.0% vs. 43.5% vs. 55.1%; P ≤ 0.021). At multivariate regression, LVEF and new PMI after TAVR were not relevant for survival. A total of 105 patients with LVEF ≤ 40% received PMI after TAVR (86 patients with RV pacing and 19 with CRT). At 5 years, all-cause mortality was significantly lower in patients with CRT-device as compared to patients without CRT-device (Kaplan Meier estimate of 21.1% vs. 48.8%; HR 0.48, CI 0.204 - 1.128; log rank p = 0.045). In multivariate analysis CRT remained a significant factor for 5-year survival in these patients (HR 0.3, CI 0.095-0.951, p = 0.041). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing TAVR, PMI did not influence 5-year survival. In patients with LVEF ≤ 40%, CRT-device implantation was associated with improved survival compared to non-CRT-device implantation.

Baroreflex activation therapy in advanced heart failure therapy: insights from a real-world scenario.

AIMS: Baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) is an innovative treatment option for advanced heart failure (HFrEF). We analysed patients' BAT acceptance and the outcome of BAT patients compared with HFrEF patients solely treated with a guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and studied effects of sacubitril/valsartan (ARNI). METHODS: In this prospective study, 40 HFrEF patients (71 ± 3 years, 20% female) answered a questionnaire on the acceptance of BAT. Follow-up visits were performed after 3, 6, and 12 months. Primary efficacy endpoints included an improvement in QoL, NYHA class, LVEF, HF hospitalization, NT-proBNP levels, and 6MHWD. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (73%) showed interest in BAT. Ten patients (25%) opted for implantation. BAT and BAT + ARNI patients developed an increase in LVEF (BAT +10%, P-value (P) = 0.005*; BAT + ARNI +9%, P = 0.049*), an improved NYHA class (BAT -88%, P = 0.014*, BAT + ARNI -90%, P = 0.037*), QoL (BAT +21%, P = 0.020*, BAT + ARNI +22%, P = 0.012*), and reduced NT-proBNP levels (BAT -24%, P = 0.297, BAT + ARNI -37%, P = 0.297). BAT HF hospitalization rates were lower (50%) compared with control group patients (83%) (P = 0.020*). CONCLUSIONS: Although BAT has generated considerable interest, acceptance appears to be ambivalent. BAT improves outcome with regard to LVEF, NYHA class, QoL, NT-proBNP levels, and HF hospitalization rates. BAT + ARNI resulted in more pronounced effects than ARNI alone.

AV-node isolation as an alternative to AV-node ablation in patients undergoing pace & ablate strategy.

INTRODUCTION: Atrioventricular (AV)-node ablation (AVNA) is a common therapy option for rate control strategy of permanent atrial fibrillation (AF). We hypothesized that isolation of the AV nodal isolation (AVNI) is associated with a more frequent preservation of an adequate escape rhythm compared to AVNA. METHODS: This retrospective study included 20 patients with therapy-refractory AF being treated with AVNI and 40 historical AVNA-controls. In AVNI the AV-node region was mapped using a 3D mapping system. Ablation was performed around the previously mapped HIS-cloud regions isolating the atrium from the AV-node. In the AVNI group, ablation was performed with irrigated tip ablation catheter in all cases. The two approaches were compared regarding rate of escape rhythm, delta QRS, and procedural data. RESULTS: The number of patients with adequate escape rhythm in AVNI was significantly superior to AVNA immediately postoperative (90% vs. 40%, p < 0.01) and during follow-up (77% vs. 36%, p < 0.05). The median change in QRS width was 0 ms in AVNI versus +26 ms in AVNA (p < 0.01). Thirty percent new bundle branch blocks in AVNA were observed compared to 0% in AVNI (p < 0.01). In the AVNI group, fluoroscopy time and total dose area product were significantly lower (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that AV-node isolation using 3D navigation mapping system is a feasible and effective alternative to conventional AVNA. The precise application of radiofrequency lesions preserves a stable AV-junctional rhythm.

Left-bundle branch pacing as bail-out strategy after failed coronary sinus lead placement for cardiac resynchronization: a case report.

Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) by implantation of an endocardial coronary sinus (CS) pacing lead is an established heart failure therapy. The recent European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines on cardiac pacing and CRT recommend conduction system pacing (CSP) as a potential bail-out therapy in patients with previously unsuccessful CS-lead implantation. We present a case in which unsuccessful implantation of a CS pacing and ineffective QRS correction by His-bundle pacing (HBP) was overcome by left-bundle branch pacing (LBBP) to achieve cardiac resynchronization. Case summary: The patient had to undergo revision of a CS lead for CRT due to rising pacing thresholds and pacing impedance. CS-lead implantation was omitted by a stenotic posterolateral CS branch. HBP did not lead to adequate QRS correction. The patient underwent successful LBB lead implantation as bail-out therapy. After LBBP lead implantation electrocardiographic and echocardiographic parameters were evident of effective CRT. Discussion: Conduction system pacing may be an alternative to CS pacing for CRT in heart failure patients, which is endorsed by the current European guidelines. LBBP may overcome limitations of HBP and provide an alternative to other strategies such as surgical implantation of epicardial left-ventricular pacing leads. Further studies are needed to fully clarify the role of LBBP for heart failure treatment.

First interventional exchange of a left transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation lead from the novel remede system.

The remede system is a novel fully implantable transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (TPNS) device developed to treat central sleep apnea. No information is published on how to explant or replace its leads. An eighty-one year-old had a fractured lead and we removed it over a wire. However, unbreachable resistances occurred with a new lead deployed over the enclosed wire and interventional endovascular techniques were performed to reimplant a new fully functioning system. This first report demonstrates TPNS lead exchange is possible but can be challenging. Interventional maneuvers and techniques, including balloon angioplasty, can facilitate this procedure.

Novel electroanatomical map for permanent his bundle pacing: the Mont Blanc approach - influence of the learning curve and procedural outcome.

AIMS: Pacing the specific conduction system like the Bundle of His (HB) can lead to more physiologic activation patterns compared to traditional right ventricular apical pacing. The aim of this study was to estimate the feasibility and value of electroanatomical mapping (EAM) for HB pacing during the learning curve and its impact on procedural outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fifteen consecutive patients were treated using EAM of the His bundle region before implantation. Voltage and activation maps of HB potentials were performed. The activation time from His potential to R wave (ECG-reference) was measured and correlated to the HV interval. The atrial and ventricular potentials were blended so the active window could only see the His potential. After completing the activation map, it was transformed into a peak-to-peak voltage map of the HB. With reversed black and white colour scale, the exact point of the maximal His signal amplitude was visualized. Procedural data for the implantation were analysed using this innovative approach. The average total procedural time and fluoroscopy time was 88.2 ± 19.1 min and 10.9 ± 4.5 min, respectively. The 3D mapping time was 18.4 ± 5.1 min. The 13.9 ± 5.1 His potential points were needed in average to complete the map. No periprocedural complications were seen in this cohort. In 86.7% of cases, His bundle pacing was successful. The average threshold for the His bundle stimulation and the R-wave amplitude was 1.62 ± 1 V (@1.0 ms) and 4.8 ± 3.2 mV, respectively. The pacing impedance was 513.5 ± 102.8 Ω. Average paced QRS complex width was 116.9 ± 20.3ms. On average 2.6 ± 1.6 lead positions were targeted to find the optimal pacing site. CONCLUSION: Electroanatomical mapping-guided implantation of His-bundle leads can facilitate the identification of optimal pacing sites and allow to minimize procedure and fluoroscopy times even during the phase of the learning curve.

Unusual Midventricular LV Obstruction With Flow Aimed to the Apex Due to Apical RV Pacing: Elimination by Sequential Septo-Apical RV Pacing.

We report the case of an 88-year-old man who developed a mid-left-ventricular (LV) obstruction caused by apical pacing to manage third-degree atrioventricular block. The flow generated by the obstruction was directed toward the LV apex and appeared from late systole to early diastole. The obstruction appeared to result from earlier contraction at the apex compared with the midventricular portion of the LV, which was followed by an also earlier apical relaxation. The obstruction was eliminated by using a second right-ventricular mid-septally attached electrode combined with a sequential septo-apical pacing (septal stimulation 40 ms before apical pacing).