Search

INTRODUCTION During left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) lead implantation, intermittent monitoring of unipolar pacing characteristics confirms LBB capture and can detect septal perforation. We aimed to demonstrate that continuous uninterrupted unipolar pacing from an inserted lead stylet (LS) is feasible and facilitates LBBAP implantation. METHODS Thirty patients (mean age 76 ± 14 years) were implanted with a stylet-driven pacing lead (Biotronik Solia S60). In 10 patients (comparison-group) conventional implantation with interrupted unipolar pacing was performed, with comparison of unipolar pacing characteristics between LS and connector-pin (CP)-pacing after each rotation step. In 20 patients (uninterrupted-group) performance and safety of uninterrupted implantation during continuous pacing from the LS were evaluated. RESULTS In the comparison-group, LS and CP-pacing impedances were highly correlated (R2 =0.95, p

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia worldwide and represents a heterogeneous disorder with a complex pathological basis. While significant technological advances have taken place over the last decade in the field of catheter ablation of AF, response to ablation varies and long-term success rates in those with persistent AF remain modest. Mechanistic studies have highlighted potentially different sustaining factors for AF in the persistent AF population with substrate-driven focal and re-entrant sources in the body of the atria identified on invasive and non-invasive mapping studies. Translation to clinical practice, however, remains challenging and the application of such mapping techniques to clinical ablation has yet to demonstrate a significant benefit beyond pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone in the persistent AF cohort. Recent advances in catheter and ablation technology have centered on improving the durability of ablation lesions at index procedure and although encouraging results have been demonstrated with early studies, large-scale trials are awaited. Further meaningful improvement in clinical outcomes in the persistent AF population requires ongoing advancement in the understanding of AF mechanisms, coupled with continuing progress in catheter technology capable of delivering durable transmural lesions.

Case description : A 74-year-old man suffering from severe heart failure (NYHA III – LVEF 28%) associated with left bundle branch block (LBBB) (Figure 1(A)) and uncontrolled permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) despite optimal medical treatment was referred for His ablation and rescue physiological pacing after a first unsuccessful LV lead implantation through the coronary sinus (CS). Careful review of the occluded CS angiogram indeed revealed no side branches. Concordantly, the patient was offered a ‘rescue’ HBP procedure. Using the SelectSecure lead (model 3830) and a C315 His sheath (Both Medtronic, Inc. MN), His mapping (HV ¼ 106ms) and recruitment were easily obtained, unfortunately without LBBB correction.

Introduction. During left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) lead implantation, intermittent monitoring of unipolar pacing characteristics validates LBB capture and can detect septal perforation. We aimed to demonstrate that continuous uninterrupted unipolar pacing from an inserted lead stylet (LS) is feasible and facilitates LBBAP implantation. Methods. Thirty patients (mean age 76 ± 14 years) were implanted with stylet-driven pacing lead (Biotronik Solia S60). In 10 patients (validation-group) conventional, interrupted implantation was performed, with comparison of unipolar pacing characteristics between LS and connector-pin (CP)-pacing after each rotation step. In 20 patients (feasibility-group) performance and safety of uninterrupted implantation during continuous pacing from the LS were analyzed. Results. In the validation-group, LS and CP-pacing impedances were highly correlated (R=0.95, p

Conventional stylet-driven leads with extendable helix can be implanted successfully for Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing (LBBAP) with a low acute complication rate. However, removal and repositioning techniques of these leads haven’t been yet described. We report 2 cases in which lead repositioning after a first unsuccessful attempt to LBBAP was associated with fracture of the helix rotating mechanism and failure to fully extract the pacing lead.

Aims Catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) reduces AF recurrence, AF burden, and improves quality of life. Data on clinical and procedural predictors of arrhythmia recurrence are scarce and are flawed by the high rate of pulmonary vein reconnection evidenced during repeat procedures after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). In this study, we identified clinical and procedural predictors for AF recurrence 1 year after CLOSE-guided PVI, as this strategy has been associated with an increased PVI durability. Methods and results Patients with paroxysmal AF, who received CLOSE-guided PVI and who participated in a prospective trial in our centre, were included in this study. Uni- and multivariate models were plotted to find clinical and procedural predictors for AF recurrence within 1 year. Three hundred twenty-five patients with a mean age of 63 years (CHA2DS2VASc 1 [1–3], left atrium diameter 41 ± 6 mm) were included. About 60.9% were male individuals. After 1 year, AF recurrence occurred in 10.5% of patients. In a binary logistic regression analysis, the diagnosis-to-ablation time (DAT) was found to be the strongest predictor of AF recurrence (P = 0.011). Diagnosis-to-ablation time ≥1 year was associated with a nearly two-fold increased risk for developing AF recurrence. Conclusion The DAT is the most important predictor of arrhythmia recurrence in low-risk patients treated with durable pulmonary vein isolation for paroxysmal AF. Whether reducing the DAT could improve long-term outcomes should be investigated in another trial.

Biventricular pacing (BVP) has been demonstrated to improve functional outcomes and mortality of patients with symptomatic heart failure, reduced LVEF and wide QRS. Unfortunately, difficult coronary sinus anatomy can limit left ventricular lead placement. In such clinical situation, His Bundle Pacing (HBP) and Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing (LBBAP) have recently appeared as attractive alternatives to BVP. We describe the case of a patient with an indication for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) and AV node ablation, where left ventricular lead implantation and corrective HBP failed. LBBAP allowed for electrical and echocardiographic resynchronization with significant functional improvement.

AIM: To evaluate the prognostic value of electrophysiological stimulation (EPS) in the risk stratification for tachyarrhythmic events and sudden cardiac death (SCD). METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study and analyzed the long-term follow-up of 265 consecutive patients who underwent programmed ventricular stimulation at the Luzerner Kantonsspital (Lucerne, Switzerland) between October 2003 and April 2012. Patients underwent EPS for SCD risk evaluation because of structural or functional heart disease and/or electrical conduction abnormality and/or after syncope/cardiac arrest. EPS was considered abnormal, if a sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) was inducible. The primary endpoint of the study was SCD or, in implanted patients, adequate ICD-activation. RESULTS: During EPS, sustained VT was induced in 125 patients (47.2%) and non-sustained VT in 60 patients (22.6%); in 80 patients (30.2%) no arrhythmia could be induced. In our cohort, 153 patients (57.7%) underwent ICD implantation after the EPS. During follow-up (mean duration 4.8 ± 2.3 years), a primary endpoint event occurred in 49 patients (18.5%). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.593 (95%CI: 0.515-0.670) for a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 35% and 0.636 (95%CI: 0.563-0.709) for inducible sustained VT during EPS. The AUROC of EPS was higher in the subgroup of patients with LVEF ≥ 35% (0.681, 95%CI: 0.578-0.785). Cox regression analysis showed that both, sustained VT during EPS (HR: 2.26, 95%CI: 1.22-4.19, P = 0.009) and LVEF < 35% (HR: 2.00, 95%CI: 1.13-3.54, P = 0.018) were independent predictors of primary endpoint events. CONCLUSION: EPS provides a benefit in risk stratification for future tachyarrhythmic events and SCD and should especially be considered in patients with LVEF ≥ 35%.