Anodal capture in cardiac resynchronization therapy implications for device programming

INTRODUCTION: Right ventricular (RV) anodal capture (AC) has been reported in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), when left ventricular (LV) pacing uses pseudobipolar (LV tip to RV proximal electrode) configuration. The aim of the study was to analyze the prevalence of AC and its implications for device programming. METHODS AND RESULTS: When AC occurred, the resulting QRS morphology was evaluated with the following pacing modes: (1) LV tip pacing plus RV AC, (2) Biventricular (BiV) pacing (i.e., both LV and RV tip pacing), and (3) BiV pacing plus RV AC. Several interventricular pacing (VV) intervals from 50 ms of LV preactivation to 30 ms of RV preactivation were tested in modes 2 and 3. From 38 consecutive patients, AC was achieved in 14 (in 74% of the pacemakers and in none of the defibrillators). LV tip pacing plus RV AC obtained narrower QRS than BiV pacing at all VV intervals in seven of the patients with AC (50%). When BiV pacing is combined with RV AC, it produced a ventricular depolarization through two wave fronts (one from the LV tip and the second from either the ring or the tip of the RV lead depending on the VV interval programmed). CONCLUSIONS: AC obtained the narrowest QRS of all tested pacing modes in a significant proportion of patients undergoing CRT. Though the stimulus was delivered from three sites (BiV pacing plus RV AC mode), only two wave fronts of ventricular activation were seen by ECG.     

Activation sequence modification during cardiac resynchronization by manipulation of left ventricular epicardial pacing stimulus strength

BACKGROUND: Success of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) depends on altering electrical ventricular activation (VA) to achieve mechanical benefit. That increases in stimulus strength (SS) can affect VA has been demonstrated previously in cardiomyopathy patients undergoing ablation. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether increasing SS can alter VA during CRT. METHODS: In 71 patients with CRT devices, left ventricle (LV) pacing was performed at escalating SS. Timing from pacing stimulus to right ventricular (RV) electrogram, ECG morphology, and maximal QRS duration on 12 lead ECG were recorded. RESULTS: Demographics: Baseline QRS duration 153 +/- 25 ms, ischemic cardiomyopathy 48%, ejection fraction 24%+/- 7%. With increased SS, conduction time from LV to right ventricle (RV) decreased from 125 +/- 56 ms to 111 +/- 59 ms (P = 0.006). QRS duration decreased from 212 +/- 46 ms to 194 +/- 42 ms (P = 0.0002). A marked change in QRS morphology occurred in 11/71 patients (15%). The RV ring was the anode in 6, while the RV coil was the anode in 5. Sites with change in QRS morphology showed decrease in conduction time from LV to RV from 110 +/- 60 ms to 64 +/- 68 ms (P = 0.04). Twelve patients (16%) had diaphragmatic stimulation with increased SS. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing LV SS reduces QRS duration and conduction time from LV to RV. Recognition of significant QRS morphology change is likely clinically important during LV threshold programming to avoid unintended VA change.     

Anodal right ventricular capture during left ventricular stimulation in CRT-implantable cardioverter defibrillators

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been shown to improve symptoms of patients with moderate to severe heart failure. Optimal CRT involves biventricular or left ventricular (LV) stimulation alone, atrio-ventricular (AV) delay optimization, and possibly interventricular timing adjustment. Recently, anodal capture of the right ventricle (RV) has been described for patients with CRT-pacemakers. It is unknown whether the same phenomenon exists in CRT systems associated with defibrillators (CRT-ICD). The RV leads used in these systems are different from pacemaker leads: they have a larger diameter and shocking coils, which may affect the occurrence of anodal capture. METHODS: We looked for anodal RV capture during LV stimulation in 11 consecutive patients who received a CRT-ICD system with RV leads with a true bipolar design. Fifteen patients who had RV leads with an integrated design were used as controls. Anodal RV and LV thresholds were determined at pulse width (pw) durations of 0.2, 0.5, and 1.0 ms. RESULTS: RV anodal capture during LV pacing was found in 11/11 patients at some output with true bipolar RV leads versus 0/15 patients with RV leads with an integrated bipolar design. Anodal RV capture threshold was more affected by changes in pw duration than LV capture threshold. In CRT-ICD systems, RV leads with a true bipolar design with the proximal ring also used as the anode for LV pacing are associated with a high incidence of anodal RV capture during LV pacing. This may affect the clinical response to alternative resynchronization methods using single LV stimulation or interventricular delay programming.     

Preservation of ventricular capture by anodal stimulation after dislodgment of an epicardial electrode

A 58-year-old man had a bipolar epicardial left ventricular (LV) implanted for cardiac resynchronization therapy after a failed transvenous approach. The system was programmed in an LV tip-right ventricular coil configuration, but during follow-up loss of LV capture with recurrence of symptoms occurred. Changing to an LV tip-LV ring configuration restored LV pacing through anodal capture. Loss of cathodal capture was caused by dislodgment of the cathodal electrode due to a broken fixation suture. Anodal capture was used to reinstall resynchronization therapy, which resulted in clinical improvement. There were no adverse effects from anodal stimulation in a follow-up period of 6 months.     

Performance of Dedicated Versus Integrated Bipolar Defibrillator Leads with CRT-Defibrillators: Results from a Prospective Multicenter Study

Introduction: Right ventricular (RV) anodal stimulation may occur in cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-D) when left ventricular (LV) pacing is configured between the LV lead and an electrode on the RV defibrillator lead. RV defibrillator leads can have a dedicated proximal pacing ring electrode (dedicated bipolar) or utilize the distal shocking coil as the proximal pacing electrode (integrated bipolar). This study compares the performance of integrated versus dedicated leads with respect to anodal stimulation incidence, sensing, and inappropriate ventricular tachyarrhythmia detection in patients implanted with CRT-D.
Methods: Two hundred ninety-two patients were randomly assigned to receive dedicated or integrated bipolar RV leads at the time of CRT-D implantation. Patients were followed for 6 months.
Results: Patients with dedicated bipolar RV leads exhibited markedly higher rates of anodal stimulation than did patients with integrated leads. The incidence of anodal stimulation was 64% at implant for dedicated bipolar RV leads compared to 1% for integrated bipolar RV leads. The likelihood of anodal stimulation in patients with dedicated leads fell progressively during the 6-month follow-up (51.5%), but always exceeded the incidence of anodal stimulation in patients with integrated leads (5%). Clinically detectable undersensing and oversensing were very unusual and did not differ significantly between lead designs. There were no inappropriate ventricular tachyarrhythmia detections for either lead type.
Conclusion: Integrated bipolar RV defibrillator leads had a significantly lower incidence of RV anodal stimulation when compared to dedicated bipolar RV defibrillation leads, with no clinically detectable oversensing or undersensing, and with no inappropriate ventricular tachyarrhythmia detections for either lead type.     

The ECG Lead I Paradox in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Background: In cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), the morphology of the QRS complex plays an important role in the determination of the pacing site and effectiveness of stimulation. Patients and Methods: Review of the electrocardiograms (ECGs) of 737 patients with a CRT device showed a negative QRS complex in lead I during right ventricular (RV) pacing and a positive QRS complex during left ventricular (LV) pacing in four patients. The RV lead was positioned in the high RV septum and the coronary sinus leads in a posterior or postero‐lateral basal level. Reversed ECG lead or pacemaker lead connection, anodal RV stimulation, and scar tissue‐related depolarization abnormalities were excluded as possible causes. Conclusion: Pacing from the high RV septum may rarely lead to a negative QRS complex and basal positions of the LV lead to a positive QRS complex in lead I during LV pacing. The lead I paradox becomes obvious when both phenomena, that are not interrelated, are present in the same patient.     

Electrical characteristics of a split cathodal pacing configuration

Several electrical configurations can be used for biventricular pacing to achieve cardiac resynchronization. Commercially approved biventricular pacing systems stimulate the RV with an endocardial lead and the LV with a unipolar lead positioned in the cardiac venous circulation using the tip electrodes of both leads linked as a common cathode. The distribution of current with this parallel circuit, split cathodal configuration is dependent on the separate impedances of the two leads. A total of 19 patients with left bundle branch block and congestive heart failure underwent implantation of a cardiac venous lead and standard bipolar right atrial and RV pacing leads. Stimulation thresholds and impedances were measured for the RV and LV in five electrical configurations: (1) unipolar LV from the cardiac venous lead; (2) bipolar LV using the tip electrode in the cardiac vein as the cathode and the ring electrode of the RV lead as the anode; (3) bipolar RV from the RV lead; (4) unipolar split cathodal stimulation of the cardiac venous and RV leads; and (5) bipolar split cathodal stimulation of the cardiac venous and RV leads. Repeat measurements of RV and LV thresholds were made from the pulse generator at 1-year follow-up. The LV stimulation threshold increased from 0.7 +/- 0.5 V in the unipolar configuration to 1.0 +/- 0.8 V in the unipolar split cathodal configuration (P = 0.01) and from 1.0 +/- 0.7 V in the bipolar configuration to 1.3 +/- 0.9 V in the bipolar split cathodal configuration (P < 0.001). The RV stimulation threshold increased from 0.3 +/- 0.2 V in the bipolar configuration to 0.5 +/- 0.2 V in the bipolar split cathodal configuration (P = 0.005). The bipolar impedance measured 874 +/- 299 Omega for the coronary venous lead, 705 +/- 152 for the RV lead, 442 +/- 87 in the split unipolar cathodal configuration, and 516 +/- 64 in the bipolar split cathodal configuration. At 1-year follow-up, the LV stimulation threshold was 1.8 +/- 1.6 in the unipolar split cathodal configuration and 2.4 +/- 1.6 in the bipolar split cathodal configuration (P = 0.003). The RV stimulation threshold at 1 year was 0.7 +/- 0.3 in the unipolar split cathodal configuration and 0.8 +/- 0.3 in the bipolar split cathodal configuration (P = 0.02). The split cathodal configuration significantly increases the apparent stimulation threshold for both the LV and the RV as compared with individual stimulation of either chamber alone. Programming to the bipolar split cathodal configuration further increases the apparent stimulation threshold. These observations support the development of pacing systems with separate LV and RV output circuits for resynchronization therapy.     

Elevations in ventricular pacing threshold with the use of the Y adaptor: implications for biventricular pacing

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a new and promising therapeutic option for patients with severe heart failure and intraventricular conduction delay. Patients who are candidates for CRT and have a previously implanted device may utilize a "Y" IS 1 connector to accommodate the coronary sinus lead. This modification has the potential to alter biventricular pacing thresholds. During an 18 month period, successful biventricular pacemaker implantation was performed in 72 patients (age: 67 +/- 11 years, left ventricular ejection fraction: 20.5 +/- 5.6%). All of these patients had severe symptomatic congestive heart failure (NYHA Class III and IV). In 20 patients a special "Y" adaptor that bifurcates the ventricular IS 1 bipolar output to two bipolar outputs or one unipolar and one bipolar output was utilized. During initial implantation, LV thresholds obtained in a unipolar configuration prior to connecting to the "Y" adaptor were significantly lower than thresholds obtained after connecting to the "Y" adaptor (1.7 +/- 1.11 V at 0.5 ms pulse width versus 2.8 +/- 1.5 V at 0.5 ms pulse width [P = 0.01]). Two patients (10%) required left ventricular lead revisions due to unacceptably high left ventricular thresholds during device follow-up. The difference in measured left ventricular thresholds between the two configurations is best explained by a resistive element that is added to the circuit when performing threshold measurement of the LV lead through the "Y" adaptor (combined tip to RV ring configuration) versus measurement of the LV lead in a unipolar configuration. This resistive element represents multiple factors including anode surface area, resistive polarization at the tissue-electrode interface, and transmyocardial resistance. LV thresholds should be measured in an LV tip to RV ring configuration or ideally in a combined tip (LV and RV) to shared ring configuration in order to accurately assess LV thresholds. This observation has significant clinical implications as loss of capture may occur as a result of improper measurement of left ventricular thresholds at the time of implantation.     

Timing of the Left Ventricular Electrogram and Acute Hemodynamic Changes During Implant of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices

Study Objective: To examine the relationship between timing of the left ventricular (LV) electrogram (EGM) and its acute hemodynamic effect on instantaneous change in LV pressure (LVdP/dt_MAX).
Patients and Methods: In 30 patients (mean = age 67 ± 7.9 years) who underwent implant of cardiac resynchronization therapy systems, the right ventricular (RV) lead was implanted at the RV apex (n = 23) or RV septum (n = 7). The LV lead was placed in a posterior (n = 14) or posterolateral (n = 16) coronary sinus tributary. QRS duration, interval from Q wave to intrinsic deflection of the LV EGM (Q-LV), and interval between intrinsic deflection of RV EGM and LV EGM (RV-LV interval) were measured. The measurements were correlated with the hemodynamic effects of optimized biventricular (BiV) stimulation, using the Pearson correlation coefficient.
Results: The mean LVdP/dt_MAX at baseline was 734 ± 180 mmHg/s, and increased to 905 ± 165 mmHg/s during simultaneous BiV pacing, and to 933 ± 172 mmHg/s after V-V interval optimization. The Pearson correlation coefficient R between QRS duration, the Q-LV interval, and the RV-LV interval at the respective LVdP/dt_MAX was 0.291 (P = 0.66), 0.348 (P = 0.030), and 0.340 (P = 0.033).
Conclusions: Similar significant correlations were observed between the acute hemodynamic effect of optimized BiV stimulation and the Q-LV and the RV-LV intervals. However, individual measurements showed an 80-ms cut-off for the Q-LV interval, beyond which the increase in LVdP/dt_MAX was <10%._.     

Site‐Specific Differences in Latency Intervals during Biventricular Pacing: Impact on Paced QRS Morphology and Echo‐Optimized V‐V Interval

Objective: To investigate differences in latency intervals during right ventricular (RV) pacing and left ventricular (LV) pacing from the (postero‐)lateral cardiac vein in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) patients and their relationship to echo‐optimized interventricular (V‐V) intervals and paced QRS morphology. Methods: We recorded digital 12‐lead electrocardiograms in 40 CRT patients during RV, LV, and biventricular pacing at three output settings. Stimulus‐to‐earliest QRS deflection (latency) intervals were measured in all leads. Echocardiographic atrioventricular (AV) and V‐V optimization was performed using aortic velocity time integrals. Results: Latency intervals were longer during LV (34 ± 17, 29 ± 15, 28 ± 15 ms) versus RV apical pacing (17 ± 8, 15 ± 8, 13 ± 7 ms) for threshold, threshold ×3, and maximal output, respectively (P < 0.001), and shortened with increased stimulus strength (P < 0.05). The echo‐optimized V‐V interval was 58 ± 31 ms in five of 40 (12%) patients with LV latency ≥ 40 ms compared to 29 ± 20 ms in 35 patients with LV latency < 40 ms (P < 0.01). During simultaneous biventricular pacing, four of five (80%) patients with LV latency ≥ 40 ms exhibited a left bundle branch block (LBBB) pattern in lead V₁ compared to three of 35 (9%) patients with LV latency < 40 ms (P < 0.01). After optimization, all five patients with LV latency ≥ 40 ms registered a dominant R wave in lead V₁. Conclusions: LV pacing from the lateral cardiac vein is associated with longer latency intervals than endocardial RV pacing. LV latency causes delayed LV activation and requires V‐V interval adjustment to improve hemodynamic response to CRT. Patients with LV latency ≥ 40 ms most often display an LBBB pattern in lead V₁ during simultaneous biventricular pacing, but a right bundle branch block after V‐V interval optimization. (PACE 2010; 1382–1391)     

Optimization of Ventricular Function by Improving the Activation Sequence During Ventricular Pacing

Abnormal electrical activation occurring during ventricular pacing reduces left ventricular (LV) pump function. Two strategies were compared to optimize LV function using ventricular pacing, minimal asynchrony and optimal sequence of electrical activation. ECG and hemodynamics aortic flowpmbe, thermodilution cardiac output, LV pressure and its maximal rates of rise (LVdP/dtpos) and fall (LVdP/dtneg) were measured in anesthetized open-chest dogs (n = 7) with healthy hearts. The QRS duration (a measure of asynchrony of activation) was 47 ± 5 ms during sinus rhythm and increased to 110 ± 12 ms during DDD pacing at the right ventricular (RV) apex with a short AV interval. During pacing at the LV apex and LV base, the QRS duration was 8%± 7% and 15%± 7% (P < 0.05) longer than during RV apex pacing, respectively. Stroke volumes, LVdP/dtpos and LVdP/dtneg, however, were higher during LV apex(15%± 16%, 10%± 12% [P<0.05], and 15%± 10%, respectively) and LV base pacing (11%± 12% [P<0.05], 3%± 12%, and 3%± 11%, respectively) than during RV apex pacing. Systolic LV pressure was not influenced significantly by the site of pacing. Biventricular pacing (RV apex together with one or two LV sites) decreased the QRS duration by approximately 20% as compared with RV apex pacing, however, it did not improve stroke volumes, LVdP/dtpos and LVdP/dtneg beyond those during pacing at the LV apex alone. In conclusion, the sequence of electrical activation is a stronger determinant of ventricular function than the synchrony of activation. For optimal LV function the selection of an optimal single pacing site, like the LV apex, is more important than pacing from multiple sites.     

A Comparison of QRS Complexes Resulting From Unipolar and Bipolar Pacing: Implications for Pace-Mapping

To examine differences in QRS configuration produced by bipolar versus unipolar pacing, 12-Iead electrocardiograms recorded during bipolar (distal cathode) pacing with 5- and 10-mm interelectrode distances were compared to electrocardiograms recorded during unipolar cathodal pacing from the distal catheter pole. Pacing was performed at a cycle length of 500 msec using each of the two bipolar configurations at current strengths equal to late diastolic threshold, twice threshold and 10 mA. The pacing site was at the right ventricular apex in 15 patients and at various left ventricular locations in 14 patients. The electrocardiograms recorded during bipolar and unipolar pacing were compared by two independent observers for minor QRS configuration changes, major configuration changes and amplitude changes. Minor configuration differences between unipolar and bipolar pacing occurred occasionally when the interelectrode distance during bipolar pacing was 5 mm (mean ± S.D. 0.5 ± 1.2 leads per electrocardiogram). However, when the interelectrode distance was 10 mm, minor configuration differences were seen more commonly (1.3 ± 2.0 leads per electrocardiogram; P < 0.05 vs 5-mm distance). Major configuration differences were uncommon with either configuration at all current strengths. Pacing at 10 mA produced a larger number of configuration differences than pacing at either threshold or twice threshold (P < 0.05). Amplitude differences were seen in a mean of 1.9 ± 2.1 leads per electrocardiogram with the 5-mm interelectrode distance and a mean of 2.9 ± 2.1 leads using the 10-mm interelectrode distance (P < 0.05). In conclusion: (1) bipolar ventricular pacing can result in QRS complexes that are different from those obtained with unipolar pacing at the same catheter location, presumably due to an anodal contribution during bipolar pacing; (2) increasing the interelectrode distance and stimulus intensity increases these differences; and (3) because the proximal electrode's contribution to depolarization can alter the QRS configuration during pacing in a variable way, the use of bipolar pace-mapping to localize sites of origin of ventricular tachycardia may result in Jess spatial resolution than unipolar pace-mapping.     

Increasing left ventricular pacing output decreases interventricular conduction time in patients with biventricular pacing systems

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of increasing LV pacing output on interventricular timing in patients with biventricular pacing systems. BACKGROUND: Clinical improvement with biventricular pacing is likely related to reduction in ventricular dysynchrony in patients with cardiomyopathy. We hypothesized that increasing left ventricular pacing output would reduce interventricular conduction time and could affect ventricular synchrony. METHODS: Forty-two sequential patients with biventricular pacing systems that permitted independent LV pacing were selected at the time of routine device interrogation. The interval between LV pacing stimulus and onset of the RV electrogram was measured during LV pacing at capture threshold and at maximum pacing output for each patient. RESULTS: The average time from LV pacing stimulus to right ventricular electrogram onset was 142.5 +/- 32.5 ms (range 90-230 ms) at threshold and 132.3 +/- 30.4 ms (range 90-220 ms) at maximum pacing output, with a mean decrease in conduction time of 10.2 +/- 10.9 ms (range 0-45 ms). There was significantly greater interventricular conduction shortening with increased pacing output in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy compared to others (14.9 +/- 11.9 ms vs 4.0 +/- 4.6 ms; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Conduction time from LV to RV shortens as LV pacing output is increased. This effect is seen to a greater degree in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, possibly related to the presence of myocardial scar near the pacing electrode. Further investigation is needed to assess the clinical outcomes related to this new method for optimizing resynchronization therapy.     

The effect of variation in the interval between right and left ventricular activation on paced QRS duration

Pacing of the RV and LV is a promising technique for treating patients with dilated cardiomyopathy and bundle branch block. The salutary effects of biventricular pacing may be due to resynchronization of LV activation. Currently, available biventricular pacemakers and implanted defibrillators produce simultaneous ventricular output pulses. The purpose of the current study was to assess the effects of variation in the timing of RV and LV activation, using the paced QRS duration as a marker of resynchronization. Twenty-six patients undergoing transvenous biventricular pacemaker implantation were studied. After stable lead positions were achieved, activation of the LV and RV was varied over a range of +/- 50 ms and the QRS duration measured on a 12-lead ECG. Only 6 (23%) of the 26 patients had maximal shortening of the paced QRS with simultaneous activation of the LV and RV. The shortest paced QRS duration was most often produced by an LV to RV interval of -30 ms (LV activation preceding RV activation). Optimization of LV to RV interval resulted in an additional 13% shortening of the paced QRS compared to simultaneous activation (P < 0.0001). Patients with leads located on the lateral or anterolateral walls of the LV were more likely to benefit from preexcitation of the LV than did patients with leads in the posterior position. Results of this study suggest that the ability to program the LV to RV interval may be useful to optimize the benefit of biventricular pacing.     

A Gastroesophageal Electrode for Atrial and Ventricular Pacing

Temporary transvenous cardiac pacing requires technical expertise and access to fluoroscopy. We have developed a gastroesophageal electrode capable of atrial and ventricular pacing. The flexible polythene gastroesophageal electrode is passed into the stomach under light sedation. Five ring electrodes, now positioned in the lower esophagus, are used for atrial pacing. A point source (cathode) on the distal tip of the electrode, now positioned in the gastric fundus. is used for ventricular pacing. Two configurations of atrial and ventricular pacing were compared: unipolar and bipolar. During unipolar ventricular pacing the indifferent electrode (anode) was a high impedance chest pad. For bipolar ventricular pacing the indifferent electrode was a ring electrode placed 2 cm proximal to the tip. Unipolar atrial pacing was performed with 1 of 5 proximal ring electrodes acting as cathode ("cathodic") or as anode ("anodic") in conjunction with a chest pad. Bipolar atrial pacing was performed using combinations of 2 of 5 ring electrodes. Atrial capture was obtained in all 55 subjects attempted. When all electrode combinations were compared, atrial capture was significantly more frequent using the bipolar approach (153/210 bipolar, 65/210 unipolar; t = 7.37, P < 0.001). For unipolar atrial pacing, cathodic stimulation (from esophagus) was more successful than anodic stimulation (cathodic 62/105, anodic 20/105; t = 5.81, P < 0.001). In 43 subjects attempted unipolar ventricular pacing resulted in a higher frequency of capture than the bipolar approach (unipolar 41/43 (95.3%), bipolar 19/43 (44.2%); P < 0.001). In conclusion, atrial pacing was optimal using pairs of ring electrodes ("bipolar") while ventricular pacing was optimal using the distal electrode tip (cathode) in conjunction with a chest pad electrode ("unipolar"). This gastroesophageal electrode may be useful in the emergency management of acute bradyarrhythmias and for elective electrophysiological studies.     

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)     

Upgrading from Single Chamber Right Ventricular to Biventricular Pacing in Permanently Paced Patients with Worsening Heart Failure: The RD-CHF Study

Background: Biventricular (BiV) stimulation lowers morbidity and mortality in patients with drug-refractory congestive heart failure (CHF), depressed left ventricular (LV) function, and ventricular dyssynchrony in absence of indication for permanent cardiac pacing. This pilot, single-blind, randomized, cross-over study examined the safety and efficacy of upgrading conventional pacing systems to BiV stimulation in patients with advanced CHF .
Methods: We included 56 patients in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional classes III or IV despite optimal drug treatment and ventricular dyssynchrony (interventriclar delay >40 ms or LV preejection delay >140 ms) in need of pacemaker replacement. We compared the patients' functional status, arrhythmias, and standard echocardiographic measurements during 3 months of conventional, single right ventricular (RV) versus 3 months of BiV stimulation .
Results: There were 44 patients in the cross-over phase. QRS duration was shortened by 23% and LV preejection delay by 16% with BiV stimulation. NYHA functional class, 6-minute hall walk and quality of life score were significantly improved with BiV stimulation compared with single RV pacing by 18%, 29%, and 19%, respectively. No significant difference was observed in the ventricular arrhythmia burden or LV reverse remodeling between the 2 periods .
Conclusions: This pilot study showed that upgrading from RV pacing to BiV pacing significantly improves symptoms and exercise tolerance in chronically paced patients with advanced CHF and mechanical dyssynchrony .     

Morphology of the RV electrogram during LV pacing is related to the hemodynamic effect in cardiac resynchronization therapy

Background: Biventricular (BiV) pacing and left ventricular (LV) pacing both improve LV function in patients with heart failure and LV dyssynchrony. We studied the hemodynamic effect of the atrioventricular (AV) interval and the associated changes in the right ventricular (RV) electrogram (EGM) during LV pacing and compared this with the hemodynamic effect of optimized sequential BiV pacing.
Methods: In 16 patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II to IV, sinus rhythm with normal AV conduction, left bundle branch block (LBBB), QRS > 130 ms, and optimal medical therapy, the changes in RV EGM during LV pacing with varying AV intervals were studied. The hemodynamic effect associated with these changes was evaluated by invasive measurement of LVdP/dt_max and compared with the result of optimized sequential BiV pacing in the same patient.
Results: All patients showed electrocardiographic fusion during LV pacing. The morphology of the RV EGM showed changes in the RV activation that indicated a shift in the extent of fusion from LV pacing. These changes were associated with significant changes in LVdP/dt_max. Baseline LV dP/dt_max was 734 ± 177 mmHg/s, which increased to 927 ± 202 mmHg/s (P<0.0001) with optimized LV pacing and to 920 ± 209 mmHg/s (P<0.0001) with optimized sequential BiV pacing.
Conclusion: The RV EGM is a proper indicator for intrinsic activation over the right bundle during LV pacing and reveals the transition to fusion in the RV EGM that is associated with a decrease in LVdP/dt_max. The hemodynamic effect of optimized LV pacing is equal to optimized sequential BiV pacing.     

An Algorithm for Verifying Biventricular Capture Based on Evoked-Response Morphology

Cardiac resynchronization therapy relies on consistent beat-by-beat myocardial capture in both ventricles. A pacemaker ensuring right (RV) and left ventricular (LV) capture through reliable capture verification and automatic output adjustment would contribute to patients' safety and quality of life. We studied the feasibility of an algorithm based on evoked-response (ER) morphology for capture verification in both the ventricles. RV and LV ER signals were recorded in 20 patients (mean age 72.5 years, range 64.3–80.4 years, 4 females and 16 males) during implantation of biventricular (BiV) pacing systems. Leads of several manufacturers were tested. Pacing and intracardiac electrogram (IEGM) recording were performed using an external pulse generator. IEGM and surface-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) signals were recorded under different pacing conditions for 10 seconds each: RV pacing only, LV pacing only, and BiV pacing with several interventricular delays. Based on morphology characteristics, ERs were classified manually for capture and failure to capture, and the validity of the classification was assessed by reference to the ECG. A total of 3,401 LV- and 3,345 RV-paced events were examined. In the RV and LV, the sensitivities of the algorithm were 95.6% and 96.1% in the RV and LV, respectively, and the corresponding specificities were 91.4% and 95.2%, respectively. The lower sensitivity in the RV was attributed to signal blanking in both channels during BiV pacing with a nonzero interventricular delay. The analysis revealed that the algorithm for identifying capture and failure to capture based on the ER-signal morphology was safe and effective in each ventricle with all leads tested in the study.     

Ventricular activation sequence during left ventricular pacing promotes QRS complex oversensing in the atrial channel

Background: Left ventricular (LV)‐only pacing has a significant effect on delay in depolarization of parts of the ventricles that are likely oversensed in the right atrial channel. The study aimed to assess the impact of ventricular activation sequence on QRS oversensing and far‐field endless‐loop pacemaker tachycardia (ELT) in patients who received cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. Methods: The study examined 102 patients with CRT devices. Oversensing artifacts in the atrial channel were inspected on intracardiac electrograms, and their timing with respect to the beginning of QRS was determined during DDD‐right ventricular (RV), DDD‐LV, DDD‐biventricular (BiV), and AAI pacing modes. The occurrence of ELT during DDD‐LV pacing with a postventricular atrial refractory period (PVARP) of 250 ms was also assessed. Results: The timing of oversensing artifacts (in relation to the beginning of surface QRS) was dependent on ventricular activation sequence, occurring promptly following intrinsic activation via the right bundle branch (47.1 ± 26.4 ms), later during RV pacing (108.7 ± 22.5 ms) or BiV pacing (109.4 ± 23.1 ms), and significantly later, corresponding to the final part of the QRS, during LV pacing (209.6 ± 40.0 ms, range: 140–340 ms, P < 0.001). Oversensing was significantly more frequent during LV than during RV pacing (35.3% vs 22.5%, P < 0.001). Far‐field ELT was observed in six patients. Conclusions: Oversensing artifacts in the atrial channel are likely caused by depolarization of the basal part of the right ventricle. The novel mechanism of QRS oversensing outside PVARP, caused by a reversed ventricular activation sequence during LV‐only pacing, may be important in some CRT patients. (PACE 2011; 34:1682–1686)