Electrocardiogram‐Based Algorithm to Predict the Left Ventricular Lead Position in Recipients of Cardiac Resynchronization Systems

Introduction: Biventricular pacing is associated with various electrocardiographic patterns depending on the position of the left ventricular (LV) lead. We aimed to develop an electrocardiogram‐based algorithm to predict the position of the LV lead. Methods: The algorithm was developed in 100 consecutive recipients of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) systems. QRS axis, morphology, and polarity were analyzed with a view to define the specific electrocardiographic characteristics associated with the various LV lead positions . The algorithm was prospectively validated in 50 consecutive CRT device recipients. Results: The first analysis of the algorithm was the QRS morphology in V₁. A positive R wave in V₁ suggested LV lateral or posterior wall stimulation. A QS pattern was specific of anterior LV leads. In the presence of an R wave in V₁, V₆ was analyzed to distinguish between an inferior and anterior LV lead. Inferior leads were never associated with a positive V₆. To differentiate between lateral and posterior positions, we analyzed the pattern in V₂. Lateral leads were associated with an R morphology in V₁ and a negative V₂. Posterior leads were associated with an R morphology in V₁ and V₂. The algorithm allowed a reliable distinction between an inferior or anterior and a lateral or posterior lead position in 90% of patients. Inferior, anterior, lateral, and posterior positions were reliably distinguished in 80% of patients. Conclusion: This algorithm predicted the position of the LV lead with a high sensitivity and predictive value.     

Left Ventricular Functional Recovery During Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy:

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves myocardial performance in patients with heart failure (HF) and left bundle-branch block (LBBB). Tissue Doppler echocardiography (TDE) has already been used to guide the selection of candidates for CRT. The objective of this study is to correlate the effects of CRT on left ventricular (LV) systolic function with wall motion synchrony assessed by TDE. High frame TDE data were obtained in 15 patients (mean age = 68.9 years, 11 men) with LBBB (QRS = 163 ± 13 ms) to derive temporal intraventricular horizontal asynchrony indexes, expressed as the time difference at the onset of shortening between the septum and the lateral (S-L) and antero-inferior (A-I) walls, and measure the amount of delayed longitudinal contraction (DLC) within the LV. All measurements were made at baseline, 24 hours after implantation, and at 1 year of follow-up. The results show that LV ejection fraction (EF) increased from 25 ± 6.2% at baseline to 36.9 ± 7.9% at 1 year, and was strongly related to DLC, expressed either by time duration (DLCd, r =−0.51; P < 0.0001) or percent of the basal segments (%DLC, r =−0.50; P < 0.001). New York Heart Association functional class, which decreased from 3.6 ± 0.5 to 2.3 ± 0.8, was correlated with %DLC (r = 0.50) and DLCd (r = 0.48, P < 0.001). Weaker correlations were found between LVEF and S-Li (r =−0.40) and between NYHA and S-Li (r = 0.40). It is concluded that DLC was the best among intraventricular asynchrony indexes in predicting increases in LVEF after CRT. DLC may be useful to identify responders to CRT.     

Similar Long-Term Benefits Conferred by Apical Versus Mid-Septal Implantation of the Right Ventricular Lead in Recipients of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Systems

Introduction: The benefits conferred by cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) are markedly influenced by the left ventricular (LV) lead placement. Little is known regarding the optimal right ventricular (RV) stimulation site.
Study Objective: To compare the long-term outcomes of CRT in patients with RV leads placed in the mid-septal region versus the apex.
Methods and Results: This nonrandomized, observational study included 117 patients with standard indications for CRT. The LV lead was implanted on the postero-lateral or lateral LV wall, while the RV lead was implanted at the apex (n = 82) or in the mid-septum (n = 35). Both groups were similar with respect to baseline clinical, demographic, and echocardiographic characteristics. After 12 months of CRT, the rates of clinical response to CRT were similar in both groups (63% vs. 66%), and similar degrees of reverse LV remodeling and LV resynchronization were observed on echocardiography and color tissue Doppler imaging. A ≥30% relative increase in LV ejection fraction (EF) occurred in 76% of patients in the RV apex group, versus 49% of patients in the RV mid-septum group (P = 0.05). A ≥45% left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was measured at 12 months in 40% of patients in the RV apex group, versus 31% in the RV mid-septum group (ns).
Conclusions: RV mid-septal stimulation was not associated with a higher rate of response to CRT or greater improvement in LV function compared to RV apical stimulation.     

Balloon‐Facilitated Delivery of a Left Ventricular Pacing Lead

While modern implant tools have contributed greatly to the success of cardiac resynchronization therapy, technical challenges remain. A common problem is the inability to advance left ventricular pacing leads into branch veins that are tortuous or arise at steep angles. In these cases, advancement of the lead causes it to buckle and prolapse into the coronary sinus or great cardiac vein. Lead prolapsed can be avoided by employing a balloon to temporarily obstruct the coronary sinus or great cardiac vein just upstream from the branch vein. The balloon redirects the force of advancement laterally into the branch vein, facilitating delivery. (PACE 2013; 36:e31–e34)     

Usefulness of a Pacing Guidewire to Facilitate Left Ventricular Lead Implantation in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Background: Intraoperative measurements of left ventricular (LV) pacing and sensing values were assessed using a novel 0.014-inch guidewire (Visionwire^®, Biotronik GmbH, Berlin, Germany) enabling pacing and sensing at the distal tip before final LV lead implantation .
Methods: Twenty-two consecutive patients selected for cardiac resynchronization therapy were studied .
Results: Significant correlation was found between the LV pacing threshold as assessed by the Visionwire^® and values after final LV lead implantation (r = 0.92, P < 0.001). Correlation for LV sensing was also significant (r = 0.72, P < 0.001). No significant correlation was present with respect to phrenic nerve stimulation. However, no phrenic nerve stimulation at 10 V/0.5 ms using the Visionwire^® identified 88% of patients without phrenic nerve stimulation at 10 V/0.5 ms with subsequent LV lead measurements .
Conclusion: This technique may facilitate transvenous LV lead implantation by preventing implantation in a unsuitable target vessel with respect to pacing and sensing values or phrenic nerve stimulation, thereby reducing procedure and fluoroscopy time .     

Bifocal Right Ventricular Cardiac Resynchronization Therapies in Patients with Unsuccessful Percutaneous Lateral Left Ventricular Venous Access

Biventricular cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with a lateral left ventricular (LV) lead cannot always be achieved. We report a single center experience of CRT utilizing a protocol that specifically required the implantation of a bifocal right ventricular (RV) lead system when lateral LV pacing could not be achieved. Consecutive candidates for CRT were included in the study. If strict criteria for lateral LV pacing were not met, they underwent implantation of a bifocal RV lead system with two 7F, active fixation leads, one placed septally at the apex, and the other in the high septal outflow tract. All patients were followed for 12 months and the two groups were compared. A biventricular (BiV) stimulation system was implanted in 44 patients, and a bifocal RV system in six. The demographic characteristics of the two groups were similar. Both groups experienced a similar improvement in functional capacity, increase in 6 minutes walking distance, and decreased need for hospitalizations. The mean increase in LV ejection fraction was 11% in the bifocal RV group versus 10% in the BiV group. Though the tissue Doppler indices of LV synchrony improved earlier in the BiV group, (19% vs 10%) the improvement was similar in both groups at 6 months (23% vs 20%). The clinical improvements conferred by CRT can be matched by a bifocal RV system in selected patients. This alternate approach should be considered when implantation of a LV lateral lead was unsuccessful.     

Long-Term Experience with a Preshaped Left Ventricular Pacing Lead

OLLITRAULT, J., et al. : Long-Term Experience with a Preshaped Left Ventricular Pacing Lead. This study describes a long-term experience with a new LV pacing lead. The study population consisted of 62 patients (85% men,   71 ± 10   years old) with advanced dilated cardiomyopathy, in NYHA Class III or IV despite optimal drug therapy, and a QRS duration >150 ms. Patients in sinus rhythm were implanted with a triple chamber pacemaker to maintain atrioventricular synchrony. A dual chamber pacemaker was implanted in patients in atrial fibrillation for biventricular pacing only. A clinical evaluation and interrogation of the resynchronization pacemaker were performed at implant, at 1 week (W1), one (M1), four (M4), and seven (M7) months after implantation. A longer follow-up (2 years) is available for patients implanted at the authors institution. LV measurements were pacing threshold at 0.5-ms pulse duration and pacing impedance. R wave amplitude (mV) was measured at the time of implantation only. The system was successfully implanted in 86% of patients with the latest design of the lead. Mean R wave amplitude at implant was   15 ± 7 mV   and mean pacing impedance was   1054 ± 254 Ω   . Between implant   (n = 38)   and M7   (n = 15)   , pacing threshold rose from   0.73 ± 0.54   to   1.57 ± 0.60 V (P < 0.001)   . In conclusion, the situs lead was successfully implanted in a high percentage of patients. In addition, low pacing threshold and high impedance measured during follow-up are consistent with a low pacing current drain, ensuring a durable pulse generator longevity. (PACE 2003; 26[Pt. II]:185–188)     

Is Right Ventricular Outflow Tract Pacing an Alternative to Left Ventricular/Biventricular Pacing?

The right ventricular apex has been used as the traditional pacing site since the development of transvenous pacing in 1959. Some studies suggest that pacing the right ventricular apex may cause remodeling and is harmful. In the past decade, there have been a multitude of studies of the hemodynamic, electrophysiological, electrocardiographic, and clinical effects of ventricular pacing at other sites. Pacing of the left ventricle singly or with biventricular pacing has emerged as an effective and safe therapy for moderate to severe congestive heart failure in patients with prolonged QRS complexes. Studies of alternate right ventricular sites, like the right ventricular outflow tract, have given mixed results. Not all patients can be treated with left ventricular pacing, which is a time-consuming and difficult procedure. Right ventricular pacing is easier and less expensive than left ventricular pacing and further study of additional right ventricular sites seems warranted. (PACE 2004; 27[Pt. II]:871–877)     

Is the Left Ventricular Lateral Wall the Best Lead Implantation Site for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy?

GASPARINI, M., et al .: Is the Left Ventricular Lateral Wall the Best Lead Implantation Site for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy? Short-term hemodynamic studies consistently report greater effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients stimulated from a LV lateral coronary sinus tributary (CST) compared to a septal site. The aim of the study was to compare the long-term efficacy of CRT when performed from different LV stimulation sites. From October 1999 to April 2002, 158 patients (mean age 65 years, mean LVEF 0.29, mean QRS width 174 ms) underwent successful CRT, from the anterior (A) CST in 21 patients, the anterolateral (AL) CST in 37 patients, the lateral (L) CST in 57 patients, the posterolateral (PL) CST in 40 patients, and the middle cardiac vein (MCV) CST in 3 patients. NYHA functional class, 6-minute walk test, and echocardiographic measurements were examined at baseline, and at 3, 6, and 12 months. Comparisons were made among all pacing sites or between lateral and septal sites by grouping AL + L + PL CST as lateral site (134 patients, 85%) and A + MC CST as septal site (24 patients, 15%). In patients stimulated from lateral sites, LVEF increased from 0.30 to 0.39   (P < 0.0001)   , 6-minute walk test from 323 to 458 m   (P < 0.0001)   , and the proportion of NYHA Class III–IV patients decreased from 82% to 10%   (P < 0.0001)   . In patients stimulated from septal sites, LVEF increased from 0.28 to 0.41   (P < 0.0001)   , 6-minute walk test from 314 to 494 m   (P < 0.0001)   , and the proportion of NYHA Class III–IV patients decreased from 75% to 23%   (P < 0.0001)   . A significant improvement in cardiac function and increase in exercise capacity were observed over time regardless of the LV stimulation sites, either considered singly or grouped as lateral versus septal sites. (PACE 2003; 26[Pt. II]:162–168)     

Left Ventricular Pressure Measurement During Noninvasive Transcutaneous Cardiac Pacing

In a pacemaker-dependent patient, the hemodynamic response during external transcutaneous and endocardial sequential pacing was evaluated by left ventricular pressure monitoring. A single ventricular pacing mode with hemodynamic effect of atrioventricular asynchrony was shown during external pacing.     

Understanding the Timing Cycles of a Cardiac Resynchronization Device Designed with Left Ventricular Sensing

Some devices used for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) can sense from the left ventricular (LV) lead as in Biotronik CRT devices (Biotronik GmbH, Berlin, Germany), whose special LV timing cycles form the basis of this report. LV sensing (LVs) was designed to prevent competitive pacing outside the LV myocardial absolute refractory period. LVs works by inhibiting the release of an LV pacemaker stimulus (LVp) in the vulnerable period of the LV during a programmable period. LVs with stored LV electrograms may also provide recordings of diagnostic value in tachyarrhythmias. LVs has added a new dimension to the evaluation of the function of CRT devices, because it is manifested by unfamiliar timing cycles. In this respect, Biotronik devices can initiate an LV upper rate interval (URI) upon sensing a right‐sided event when LVs is turned off. An inhibited LVp can also initiate an LVURI. The LVURI should generally be programmed to a relatively short duration and shorter than the right ventricular URI to prevent a special form of desynchronization arrhythmia sustained by LVs. This arrhythmia is characterized by recurring delayed LVs events in sequences associated with RV pacing followed by LVs events with loss of LVp.     

Interlead Distance and Left Ventricular Lead Electrical Delay Predict Reverse Remodeling During Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Background: Both anatomic interlead separation and left ventricle lead electrical delay (LVLED) have been associated with outcomes following cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, the relationship between interlead distance and electrical delay in predicting CRT outcomes has not been defined. Methods: We studied 61 consecutive patients undergoing CRT for standard clinical indications. All patients underwent intraprocedural measurement of LVLED. Interlead distances in the horizontal (HD), vertical (VD), and direct (DD) dimensions were measured from postprocedure chest radiographs (CXR). Remodeling indices [percent change in left ventricle (LV) ejection fraction, end‐diastolic, end‐systolic dimensions] were assessed by transthoracic echocardiogram. Results: There was a positive correlation between corrected LVLED and HD on lateral CXR (r = 0.361, P = 0.004) and a negative correlation between LVLED and VD on posteroanterior (PA) CXR (r =?0.281, P = 0.028). To account for this inverse relationship, we developed a composite anatomic distance (defined as: lateral HD—PA VD), which correlated most closely with LVLED (r = 0.404, P = 0.001). Follow‐up was available for 48 patients. At a mean of 4.1 ± 3.2 months, patients with optimal values for both corrected LVLED (≥75%) and composite anatomic distance (≥15 cm) demonstrated greater reverse LV remodeling than patients with either one or neither of these optimized values. Conclusions: We identified a significant correlation between LV–right ventricular interlead distance and LVLED; additionally, both parameters act synergistically in predicting LV anatomic reverse remodeling. Efforts to optimize both interlead distance and electrical delay may improve CRT outcomes. (PACE 2010; 575–582)