A Prospective Randomized Trial of Defibrillation Thresholds from the Right Ventricular Outflow Tract and the Right Ventricular Apex

Background: Right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) pacing has been suggested to improve hemodynamics and to help prevent pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. Pacing from the RVOT is feasible and equivalent in terms of sensing and stimulation threshold. However, physicians have been reluctant to use RVOT pacing because of concerns that defibrillation efficacy might be adversely affected. To date, there have been no randomized-controlled trials published comparing the defibrillation threshold in leads implanted in the RVOT and the right ventricular apex (RVA).
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare defibrillation thresholds (DFT) in the RVOT and RVA. Ventricular sensing and stimulation thresholds were also compared.
Methods: This prospective, randomized, multicenter study included 87 patients (70 males, age 69 ± 11 years). At implantation, the patient's ventricular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) lead position was randomized to either the RVOT or RVA. A four-shock Bayesian up-down method was used to determine the DFT. Patients were followed for 3 months postimplant.
Results: DFTs were not significantly different in leads implanted in the RVOT (median 8.8 J [6.28, 12.9] vs. 7.9 J [6.20, 12.6], P = 0.65). Threshold and impedance measurements were stable in both RVOT and RVA groups from implant to follow-up. All ICD leads remained stable chronically at the 3-month follow-up.
Conclusion: DFTs in leads placed in the RVOT and RVA are comparable. RVOT ICD lead placement is safe and exhibits similar lead stability, threshold, and impedance measurements as the traditional RVA location.     

Right Ventricular Septal Pacing: The Success of Stylet-Driven Active-Fixation Leads

Background: The detrimental effects of right ventricular (RV) apical pacing on left ventricular function has driven interest in alternative pacing sites and in particular the mid RV septum and RV outflow tract (RVOT). RV septal lead positioning can be successfully achieved with a specifically shaped stylet and confirmed by the left anterior oblique (LAO) fluoroscopic projection. Such a projection is neither always used nor available during pacemaker implantation. The aim of this study was to evaluate how effective is the stylet-driven technique in septal lead placement guided only by posterior-anterior (PA) fluoroscopic view.
Methods: One hundred consecutive patients with an indication for single- or dual-chamber pacing were enrolled. RV septal lead positioning was attempted in the PA projection only and confirmed by the LAO projection at the end of the procedure.
Results: The RV lead position was septal in 90% of the patients. This included mid RV in 56 and RVOT in 34 patients. There were no significant differences in the mean stimulation threshold, R-wave sensing, and lead impedance between the two sites . In the RVOT, 97% (34/35) of leads were placed on the septum, whereas in the mid RV the value was 89% (56/63).
Conclusions: The study confirms that conventional active-fixation pacing leads can be successfully and safely deployed onto the RV septum using a purposely-shaped stylet guided only by the PA fluoroscopic projection. (PACE 2010; 49–53)     

Right Ventricular Septal Pacing: A Comparative Study of Outflow Tract and Mid Ventricular Sites

Background: Prolonged right ventricle (RV) apical pacing is associated with left ventricle (LV) dysfunction due to dysynchronous ventricular activation and contraction. Alternative RV pacing sites with a narrower QRS compared to RV pacing might reflect a more physiological and synchronous LV activation. The purpose of this study was to compare the QRS morphology, duration, and suitability of RV outflow tract (RVOT) septal and mid‐RV septal pacing. Methods: Seventeen consecutive patients with indication for dual‐chamber pacing were enrolled in the study. Two standard 58‐cm active fixation leads were passed to the RV and positioned in the RVOT septum and mid‐RV septum using a commercially available septal stylet (model 4140, St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN, USA). QRS duration, morphology, and pacing parameters were compared at the two sites. The RV lead with less‐satisfactory electrical parameters was withdrawn and deployed in the right atrium. Results: Successful positioning of the pacing leads at the RVOT septum and mid‐RV septum was achieved in 15 patients (88.2%). There were no significant differences in the mean stimulation threshold, R‐wave sensing, and lead impedance between the two sites. The QRS duration in the RVOT septum was 151 ± 14 ms and in the mid‐RV septum 145 ± 13 ms (P = 0.150). Conclusions: This prospective observational study shows that septal pacing can be reliably achieved both in the RVOT and mid‐RV with active fixation leads using a specifically shaped stylet. There are no preferences in regard to acute lead performance or paced QRS duration with either position. (PACE 2010; 33:1169–1173)     

Thresholds and Complications with Right Ventricular Septal Pacing Compared to Apical Pacing

Background: Right ventricular septal pacing has been proposed as an alternative to apical pacing. However, data concerning thresholds and requirement for lead repositioning with this technique are scant.
Methods: We reviewed data at implantation and follow-up of 362 consecutive recipients of the same model of active fixation lead (Medtronic 5076-58, Minneapolis, MN, USA) to avoid differences due to lead characteristics. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether the lead was positioned on the interventricular septum (n = 157) or at the right ventricular apex (n = 205). Thresholds, lead impedance, and requirement for lead repositioning were compared between groups at implantation and follow-up.
Results: There were no differences between the septal and apical groups in sensing and pacing thresholds or lead impedance, either at implantation or during a 24-month follow-up. In the septal group, the lead had to be repositioned in four patients (2.5%) due to lead dislodgement in two patients, acute threshold rise in one patient, and pericardial effusion in another patient (the lead had unintentionally been positioned on the anterior free wall in these last two patients). In the apical group, the lead had to be repositioned in eight patients (3.9%, P = 0.56) due to lead dislodgement in three patients and acute threshold rise in five patients.
Conclusions: Acute and chronic thresholds associated with septal pacing are similar to those observed with apical pacing, and risk of lead dislodgement is low. However, multiple radioscopic views must be used to avoid inadvertent positioning of the lead on the anterior free wall .     

Five-Year Follow-Up of a Bipolar Steroid-Eluting Ventricular Pacing Lead

Steroid-eluting pacing leads are known to attenuate the threshold peaking early after implantation. Long-term performance, however, is not yet settled. The lead design tested in this prospective study combines a 5.8-mm2 tip of microporous platinum-iridium with elution of 1.0 mg of dexamethasone sodium phosphate and tines for passive fixation (model 5024, Medtronic Inc.). In 50 patients (mean age 69 +/- 10 years), the electrode was implanted in the right ventricular apex. Follow-up was performed on days 0, 2, 5, 10, 28, 90, 180 and every 6 months thereafter for 5-years postimplant. At each visit, pacing thresholds were determined as pulse duration (ms) at 1.0 V and as the minimum charge (microC) delivered for capture. Lead impedance (omega) was telemetered at 2.5 V-0.50 ms, and sensing thresholds (mV) were measured in triplicate using the automatic sensing threshold algorithm of the pacemaker implanted (model 294-03, Intermedics Inc.). On the day of implantation, mean values were 0.10 +/- 0.03 ms, 0.12 +/- 0.03 microC, 758 +/- 131 omega, and 13.1 +/- 1.8 mV, respectively. Beyond 1-year postimplant, pacing thresholds did not vary significantly. Sensing thresholds and lead impedance values were stable during long-term follow-up. Five years after implantation, mean values were 0.23 +/- 0.11 ms, 0.24 +/- 0.07 microC, 670 +/- 139 omega, and 11.6 +/- 3.1 mV for pulse width and charge threshold, lead impedance, and sensing threshold, respectively, and all leads captured at 1.0 V with the longest pulse duration available (1.50 ms). It is concluded that the bipolar steroid-eluting tined ventricular lead showed stable stimulation thresholds, lead impedance values, and sensing thresholds for 5 years after implantation.     

Electrical Performance and Automatic Capture Characteristics of a 3.5-mm2 Passive Fixation Lead during 1-Year Follow-Up

Background: Bipolar low polarization electrodes are recommended for a regular AutoCapture™ (St. Jude Medical, Inc., Sylmar, CA, USA) function in order to effectively detect the evoked response (ER) signal. The objective of this national multicenter registry was to evaluate the electrical performance and the AutoCapture™ characteristics of the bipolar ventricular pacing lead IsoFlex S, model 1636T or 1646T (St. Jude Medical), in combination with single- and dual-chamber pacemakers.
Methods: Ventricular pacing and sensing thresholds, lead impedance, ER amplitude, and polarization signals were measured at discharge and routine follow-up visits after 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. AutoCapture™ activation was recommended based on the results of the ER sensitivity test.
Results: Of the 252 patients initially included, 109 (43%) have completed the follow-up. The mean ventricular pacing threshold was 0.43 ± 0.19 V at discharge and 0.68 ± 0.32 V at 12 months postimplant. The values for the ventricular sensing threshold were between 9.51 ± 4.12 and 9.99 ± 4.09 mV at discharge and at the 12-month follow-up. The unipolar lead impedance decreased from 533 ± 94 to 476 ± 73 ohms during the follow-up. The mean ER amplitude was 16.47 ± 6.70 mV at discharge and 17.42 ± 7.43 mV after 12 months, and the corresponding mean polarization signals were 0.59 ± 1.00 and 0.74 ± 1.24 mV, respectively. AutoCapture™ activation was recommended in at least 95% of the patients investigated over the 12-month follow-up.
Conclusion: The bipolar ventricular pacing lead IsoFlex S 1636/1646T shows a good electrical performance and is mostly compatible with the AutoCapture™ algorithm.     

Backup Right Ventricular Pacing with a 0.035" Guidewire during Implantation of Left Ventricular Leads

Introduction: During implantation of biventricular devices, manipulation of the guiding sheath during localization of the coronary sinus (CS) ostium may result in injury to the right bundle and complete heart block. A preventive measure is to implant the right ventricular (RV) lead first, though this may interfere with manipulation of the guiding sheath and dislodge the permanent lead . We tested the feasibility of backup pacing with a 0.035" guidewire, advanced through the guiding sheath during CS localization.
Methods: One hundred six consecutive patients (mean age = 70 ± 11 years, 81 men) undergoing biventricular device implantation were studied. A 0.035" guidewire with an uncoated tip was advanced into the right ventricle through the guiding sheath, and unipolar capture threshold, R-wave sensing amplitude, and pacing impedance were measured.
Results: RV pacing was successful in all patients. The mean capture threshold was 3.8 ± 2.1 V/0.5 ms, R-wave amplitude 5.4 ± 4.3 mV, and pacing impedance 226 ± 78 Ω. No arrhythmia was observed during the tests. Two patients developed complete heart block during the implant procedure and were successfully paced temporarily using the 0.035" guidewire.
Conclusion: Temporary RV pacing, using a 0.035" guidewire within the guiding sheath, is a simple, reliable, and safe method that allows backup pacing in case of traumatic complete heart block, developing during the implantation of biventricular devices.     

A New Efficient NanoTip Lead

STOKES, K., ET AL.: A New Efficient NanoTip Lead. The ideal lead has low, stable acute and chronic thresholds, high pacing impedance, and good sensing. Leads with low, stable thresholds have been developed, but pacing impedance has been in the 600 Ω region. One way to increase pacing impedance is to decrease the electrode's surface area. The threshold performance and sensing ability of < 5 mm² electrodes have been considered questionable, up to now. We have developed α 1.5 mm² porous, platinized, steroid-eluting electrode and have demonstrated in canine studies that it has excellent performance. Chronic thresholds are low at about 0.65 ± 0.28 V (ventricular) and 0.42 ± 0.12 V (atrial) at 0.5 msec. Chronic pacing impedance is in the 1200–1300 Ω region, but mean chronic R and P wave source impedance is ≤ 1500 Ω. Sensing is excellent, with almost double the P wave amplitudes usually measured in the canine.     

Evaluation of fractal-coated temporary pacing leads in the early postoperative course

Background: The performance of temporary pacing wires is still limited by capture and sensing problems. Fractal coating can enhance electrical properties and reliability. We therefore investigated fractal-laminated wires in comparison with conventional wires.
Methods: In 21 patients two unipolar, fractal-coated pacing wires (fe) and one conventional bipolar electrode (se) were implanted in ventricular position. Afterward pacing threshold (V), R-wave sensing (mV), lead impedance (ohm), and slew-rate (mV/s) were measured. Loss of capture or sensing and dislocation was documented. fe wires were examined with energy dispersive x-ray diffraction (EDX)-analysis and scanning electrode microscopy (SEM).
Results: Failure in pacing was less frequent in fe wires. Also fe leads had lower pacing thresholds at implantation (0.76 ± 0.15 V vs 1.51 ± 0.95 V, P< 0.0001) and afterward. Furthermore fe wires showed lower increase of pacing threshold/time (0.25 V/day vs 0.42 V/day). R-wave sensing and slew-rate values in the fe group on day of operation (5.81 ± 4.80 mV; 0.63 ± 0.71 V/s) were lower than in the se group (10.37 ± 6.89 mV; 1.85 ± 1.71 V/s P< 0.0001) and afterward. Nevertheless, decrease of amplitude/time was lower in fe wires (0.17mV/day vs 0.46 mV/day). fe wires always had lower impedance values.
Conclusions: Lower pacing threshold and increase of threshold/time in fe wires indicate more reliable function. Initial lower sensitivity values are still not understandable and must be investigated. However, fe wires, constancy of sensing and impedance values was more stable, so fe epicardial wires can be recommended for safe and feasible use.     

Right ventricular outflow tract pacing: radiographic and electrocardiographic correlates of lead position

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the pacing site in an unselected series of patients undergoing right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) lead placement and investigate the role of the electrocardiogram (ECG) in predicting implantation. BACKGROUND: Right ventricular apical pacing is associated with long-term adverse effects on left ventricular function, fuelling interest in alternative pacing sites, especially the RVOT. Previous studies have been conflicting, possibly due to poor definition of pacing site within the RVOT. METHODS: In 150 patients undergoing pacemaker implantation, implanters were asked to place the lead in the RVOT. Radiographs were performed in the antero-posterior (AP) and 40 degrees right and left anterior-oblique projections post procedure. Fifty-six had left lateral radiographs. Lead position was categorized using AP/RAO (right anterior oblique) to confirm RVOT placement and left anterior oblique to distinguish free wall from septum. A 12-lead ECG was performed during ventricular pacing. RESULTS: Leads were below the RVOT in 18. Of the remaining 132, the majority (94%) were in the inferior/low RVOT. Eighty-one out of 132 were septal and 51 free wall. Septal sites were associated with shorter QRS duration (134 ms vs 143 ms, P < 0.02). Free wall sites displayed more frequent notching of the inferior leads (P < 0.01). A negative deflection in lead I provided a positive predictive value of 90% for septal sites. In those with lateral radiographs, a posteriorly projected lead was 100% specific for septal placement. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the heterogeneity of lead placement within the RVOT. Septal and free wall sites display characteristic ECG patterns which may be used to aid placement. The left lateral radiograph is useful in confirming a true septal location.     

Long-Term Performance of the Attain Model 4193 Left Ventricular Lead

Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has proven to be a valuable therapy addition for patients with drug-refractory heart failure and a ventricular conduction delay. Delivery of CRT is dependent upon the successful implantation and chronic performance of a left ventricular (LV) pacing lead. This study assessed the long-term electrical performance and safety of a steroid-eluting, transvenous, over-the-wire, cardiac vein pacing lead.
Methods: The Attain Model 4193 LV lead (Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis MN, USA) was successfully implanted in 1,070 patients with 286 patients completing 3 years of follow-up. Clinical data were collected at pre-implant, implant, and at 6-month intervals for 3 years.
Results: Over 3 years, the mean chronic pacing threshold ranged from 1.9 V to 2.1 V, the mean R-wave sensing amplitudes ranged between 13.6 mV and 15.0 mV, and the mean pacing impedance ranged between 562 ohms and 590 ohms. Additionally, the observed freedom from first post-implant LV-lead-related complications was 90.4%. Of 1,070 total patients, 82 experienced 89 LV-lead-related adverse events requiring invasive interventions or resulting in the termination of the CRT therapy. The LV lead was repositioned in 31 patients, replaced in 21 patients, and explanted/capped in four patients. There were no deaths related to the LV lead during implantation or during the follow-up period.
Conclusions: The data suggest that the 4193 LV lead is safe and effective over time. The LV lead electrical measurements remained stable through follow-up, demonstrating reliable long-term performance within the recommended value range at 36 months and had an acceptable complication rate.     

Long-term Stability of Endocardial Left Ventricular Pacing Leads Placed via the Coronary Sinus

Background: Left ventricular endocardial pacing leads placed via the coronary sinus (CS) are increasingly implanted to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT); however, the long-term stability of these leads is unknown. We sought to determine the implant success and long-term stability of CS leads in our single center experience.
Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent CRT via implantation of the CS lead between January 1999 and December 2005 were included. Pacing thresholds at implant and during long-term follow-up were reviewed and the rate of acute (within 24 hours of implant) and chronic (>24 hours) lead failure was determined.
Results: A total of 512 patients (mean age 68 ± 12 years; 409 [80%] male) underwent CRT device implantation and were included. The CS lead implantation was successful on the initial implantation in 487 patients (95%) and subsequently successful in six patients (24%) in whom initial attempts were unsuccessful. Acute lead failure occurred in 25 patients (5.1%) and was most commonly due to persistent extra-cardiac stimulation. The rate of chronic lead failure was 4% in the first year and remained stable during long-term follow-up. The CS lead pacing thresholds remained stable with only minimal increase (1.42 ± 0.85 V/0.42 ± 0.25 ms vs 1.51 ± 1.05 V/0.47 ± 0.29 ms; P = 0.04).
Conclusions: Placement of a left ventricular pacing lead via the CS is feasible and safe in the vast majority of patients. Once placed, the CS leads remain stable with excellent pacing thresholds over the longer term.     

The right ventricular outflow tract: the road to septal pacing

BACKGROUND: Pacing from the right ventricular apex is associated with long-term adverse effects on left ventricular function. This has fuelled interest in alternative pacing sites, especially the septal aspect of the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT). However, it is a common perception that septal RVOT pacing is difficult to achieve. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this article, we will review the anatomy of the RVOT and discuss the importance of standard radiographic views and the 12-lead electrocardiogram in aiding lead placement. We will also describe a method utilizing a novel stylet shape, whereby a conventional active-fixation, stylet-driven lead can be easily and reliably deployed onto the RVOT septum.     

Feasibility Of Temporary Biventricular Pacing In Patients With Reduced Left Ventricular Function After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Background and Methods: Biventricular pacing improves hemodynamics after weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass in patients with severely reduced left ventricular (LV) function undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We examined the feasibility of temporary biventricular pacing for 96 hours postoperatively. Unipolar epicardial wires were placed on the roof of the right atrium (RA), the right ventricular (RV) outflow tract, and the LV free lateral wall and connected to an external pacing device in 51 patients (mean LV ejection fraction 35 ± 4%). Pacing and sensing thresholds, lead survival and incidence of pacemaker dysfunction were determined.
Results: Atrial and RV pacing thresholds increased significantly by the 4th postoperative day, from 1.6 ± 0.2 to 2.5 ± 0.3 V at 0.5 ms (P = 0.03) at the RA, 1.4 ± 0.3 V to 2.7 ± 0.4 mV (P = 0.01) at the RV, and 1.9 ± 0.6 V to 2.9 ± 0.7 mV (P = 0.3) at the LV, while sensing thresholds decreased from 2.0 ± 0.2 to 1.7 ± 0.2 mV (P = 0.18) at the RA, 7.2 ± 0.8 to 5.1 ± 0.7 mV (P = 0.05) at the RV, and 9.4 ± 1.3 to 5.5 ± 1.1 mV (P = 0.02) at the LV. The cumulative overall incidence of lead failure was 24% by the 4th postoperative day, and was similar at the RV and LV. We observed no ventricular proarrhythmia due to pacing or temporary pacemaker malfunction.
Conclusions: Biventricular pacing after CABG using a standard external pacing system was feasible and safe.     

Serial Changes in Right Ventricular Apical Pacing Lead Impedance Predict Changes in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Functional Class in Heart Failure Patients

Pacing impedance has been proposed to monitor the clinical status of patients with congestive heart failure (CHF). This study examined whether changes in right ventricular (RV) pacing impedance correlate with changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class during long-term follow-up in pacemaker recipients with CHF. The study included 67 patients, 70 ± 12 years of age, in NYHA class II or III, and with a mean LVEF = 29 ± 8% at implant. LVEF, NYHA class, and bipolar pacing impedance at the RV outflow tract (RVOT) and apex (RVA) were measured at implant and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of follow-up. At implant, impedance was similar in RVOT (548 ± 115 Ω) and RVA (571 ± 174 Ω). Between implant and 3 months, mean impedance decreased (P < 0.0001) at both the RVOT (472 ± 62 Ω) and RVA (488 ± 86 Ω), LVEF increased (43 ± 14%, P < 0.0001), and the NYHA class decreased from 2.4 ± 0.5 to 2.1 ± 0.6 (P = 0.0001). Changes in RVA impedance correlated with changes in LVEF (r = 0.45, P = 0.002). A 50 Ω decrease in RVA impedance corresponded to a 3% decrease in LVEF. RVA impedance decreased significantly as NYHA class increased from I to IV (P = 0.04). There was no correlation between impedance measured at the RVOT and LVEF or NYHA class. A decrease in bipolar pacing impedance at the RVA was associated with worsening LVEF and the NYHA class. The use of pacing impedance to monitor the clinical status in CHF is dependent on the RV pacing site.     

Intracardiac echocardiography-guided his bundle pacing and atrioventricular nodal ablation

Background: His bundle pacing (HBP) results in rapid synchronous ventricular activation, but has been associated with long procedure times and compromised pacing and sensing performance. This study sought to reduce procedure time and radiation exposure, and improve electrical performance through more accurate lead placement.
Methods: Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) was used to guide ablation and lead implantation at the His bundle, right atrial appendage (RAA), and right ventricular apex (RVA), and to assess cardiac function. Custom bipolar screw-in leads with steerable delivery sheaths and an ablation catheter were navigated using ICE (local detailed imaging) and fluoroscopy (global imaging) in anesthetized closed-chest canines (N = 6).
Results: HBP (N = 1) or His + ventricular septal pacing (N = 5) was achieved in all canines. The QRS width was 59.7 ± 5.3 ms for canines in sinus rhythm (SR) and 82.8 ± 16.6 ms for canines with HBP (P = 0.0086). The QRS width for RVA pacing was 106.3 ± 18.4 ms (P = 0.042 vs HBP; P = 0.00013 vs SR). HBP thresholds were 3.0 ± 1.0 volts at 0.5 ms (N = 5 due to a late exit block in one canine). The average procedure duration for His lead placement was 40 ± 28 minutes (range of 3–81 minutes) and the total procedural X-ray exposure was 12 ± 12 minutes (range of 2–30 minutes). Hemodynamic performance was similar for HBP and RAA pacing.
Conclusions: Feasibility of ICE guidance for His pacing and precision ablation of the atrioventricular (AV) node has been shown. This anatomic approach improved accuracy, limited X-ray exposure, and might allow His pacing in patients with preexisting AV nodal block.     

Search for the Optimal Right Ventricular Pacing Site: Design and Implementation of Three Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trials

Background: The optimal site to permanently pace the right ventricle (RV) has yet to be determined. To address this issue, three randomized prospective multicenter clinical trials are in progress comparing the long-term effects of RV apical versus septal pacing on left ventricular (LV) function. The three trials are Optimize RV Selective Site Pacing Clinical Trial (Optimize RV), Right Ventricular Apical and High Septal Pacing to Preserve Left Ventricular Function (Protect Pace), and Right Ventricular Apical versus Septal Pacing (RASP).
Methods: Patients that require frequent or continuous ventricular pacing are randomized to RV apical or septal pacing. Optimize RV excludes patients with LV ejection fraction <40% prior to implantation, whereas the other trials include patients regardless of baseline LV systolic function. The RV septal lead is positioned in the mid-septum in Optimize RV, the high septum in Protect Pace, and the mid-septal inflow tract in RASP. Lead position is confirmed by fluoroscopy in two planes and adjudicated by a blinded panel. The combined trials will follow approximately 800 patients for up to 3 years.
Results: The primary outcome in each trial is LV ejection fraction evaluated by radionuclide ventriculography or echocardiography. Secondary outcomes include echo-based measurements of ventricular/atrial remodeling, 6-minute hall walk distance, brain natriuretic peptide levels, and clinical events (atrial tachyarrhythmias, heart failure, stroke, or death).
Conclusion: These selective site ventricular pacing trials should provide evidence of the importance of RV pacing site in the long-term preservation of LV function in patients that require ventricular pacing and help to clarify the optimal RV pacing site.     

Right Atrial Appendage Versus Bachmann's Bundle Stimulation: A Two-Year Comparative Study of Electrical Parameters in Myotonic Dystrophy Type-1 Patients

Aim: We performed a two-year follow-up comparative study of long-term electrical parameters between the right atrial appendage (RAA) and Bachmann's Bundle (BB) stimulation in myotonic dystrophy type 1 (MD1) patients.
Methods: Twenty-five MD1 patients (18 men; age: 54 ± 13 years) with no difference in the electrical parameters between the RAA site and the BB region at implantation were randomized into two groups: in group I (13 patients; age: 52 ± 14 years; four women) the atrial lead was placed in the RAA and in group II (12 patients, age: 56 ± 12 years, three women) the lead was placed in the BB region. Measurements of electrical parameters were recorded at follow-up intervals of 6 weeks and then 12 and 24 months postimplant.
Results: There was no statistically significant different in P-wave amplitude, pacing threshold, and impedance values between the two groups at 6 weeks. At 24 months follow-up, the intrinsic P-wave amplitude was 2.05 ± 1.45 mV in the RAA group versus 3.28 ± 1.09 mV in the BB group (P < 0.05); the pacing threshold was 1.85 ± 1.8 V in the RAA group versus 0.50 ± 0.39 V in the BB group (P = 0.03); there were no differences in the atrial impedance between the two groups during the follow-up period.
Conclusions: In a direct two-year follow-up comparison between the RAA and BB atrial pacing sites, we showed a statistically significant increased pacing threshold and decreased intrinsic P-wave amplitude during RAA stimulation in MD1 patients.     

Right ventricular outflow tract pacing: practical and beneficial. A 9-year experience of 460 consecutive implants

BACKGROUND: Pacing from the right ventricular apex (RVA) in patients with ventricular dysfunction has been identified as a possible contributor to deterioration of ventricular function. Therefore, alternative pacing sites such as the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) are receiving intensified scrutiny. An unresolved question is whether technical, procedural, and stability issues are comparable for the RVA and the RVOT. METHODS: This report details 460 consecutive ventricular pacing lead implants with the primary intended site in the RVOT. Patients were evaluated for success, complication rates, and followed-up for stability of pacing parameters. The total patient implant population included 300 male and 170 female patients with a mean age of 70.6 years. Ten patients were excluded from the analysis, since there was a primary indication and intention to implant in the RVA, leaving a total of 460 patients for analysis. The indications for pacing were symptomatic bradycardia due to any cause and/or Mobitz II or complete heart block. There was no clinical evidence of heart failure in 420 patients. In 40 patients with heart failure, the indication for pacing was cardiac resynchronization therapy using the RVOT as an alternate site when pacing from a branch vein of the coronary sinus was not possible. Outcome information was obtained from the implanter's clinic. RESULTS: The overall success rate in the RVOT was 84% over the total 9-year period with a 92% success rate in the last 4(1/2) years, using the RVOT technique described. At 20 months in a subgroup comparison of RVOT and RVA implants, there was no significant difference in pacing threshold, R-wave sensing, or pacing lead impedance. Dislodgment occurred in only 1 of 460 patients. Reasons for failure to implant in the RVOT include inability to find a stable position with adequate pacing and sensing thresholds (related to anatomy, scarred myocardium, pulmonary hypertension, tricuspid regurgitation), hemodynamic instability limiting time for implant, and a learning curve. Long-term stability and lead performance were excellent, and certain acute and chronic complications of RV pacing did not occur.     

The right ventricular outflow tract: a comparative study of septal, anterior wall, and free wall pacing

BACKGROUND: There is marked heterogeneity in right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) pacemaker lead placement using conventional leads. As a result, we have sought to identify a reproducible way of placing a ventricular lead onto the RVOT septum. METHODS AND RESULTS: A major determinant is the shape of the stylet used to deliver the active-fixation lead. We compared stylet shapes and configurations in patients who initially had a ventricular lead placed onto the anterior or free wall of the RVOT and then had the lead repositioned onto the septum. All leads were loaded with a stylet fashioned with a distal primary curve to facilitate delivery of the lead to the pulmonary artery, then using a pullback technique the lead was retracted to the RVOT. All lead placements were confirmed by fluoroscopy and electrocardiography. Anterior or free wall placement was achieved by the stylet having either the standard curve or an added distal anterior angulation. In contrast, septal lead positioning was uniformly achieved by a distal posterior angulation of the curved stylet. This difference in tip shape was highly predictive for septal placement (P < 0.001). With septal pacing, a narrower QRS duration was noted, compared to anterior or free wall pacing (136 vs 155 ms, P < 0.001). All pacing parameters were within acceptable limits. CONCLUSION: Using appropriately shaped stylets, pacing leads can now be placed into specific positions within the RVOT and in particular septal pacing can be reliably and reproducibly achieved. This is an important step in the standardization of lead placement in the RVOT.