Search

Temporary epicardial pacing frequently is employed after cardiac surgery, and can have a significant impact on a patient's hemodynamics, arrhythmias, and valvulopathies. Given that anesthesiologists often are involved intimately in the initial programming and subsequent management of epicardial pacing in the operating room and intensive care unit, it is important for practitioners to have a detailed understanding of the modes, modifiable intervals, and potential complications that can occur after cardiac surgery. Because this topic has not been reviewed recently in anesthesia literature, the authors attempted to review relevant epicardial pacemaker specifics, discuss modes and parameters that apply to the perioperative period, present an algorithm for mode selection, describe the potential effects of epicardial pacing on valvulopathies and hemodynamics, and, finally, discuss some postoperative considerations.

Performance of the leadless pacemaker capable of atrioventricular (AV) synchronous pacing in de novo patients warrants further investigation.The aims of this study were to assess what programming changes are needed to achieve proper atrial tracking and to study the percentage of AV synchrony (AVS) the device can provide under real-world conditions.Consecutive patients undergoing Micra AV implantation between June 2020 and November 2021 were studied. Reprogramming of atrial sensing parameters during follow-up was performed by following device counters. AVS was studied with an ambulatory 24-hour Holter monitor and automatically analyzed by an electrocardiogram delineation system. The primary end point was AVS ≥85% of total cardiac cycles during 24-hour Holter electrocardiogram monitoring.Thirty-one patients who remained in VDD mode were studied, and all of them required manual reprogramming. The automatic A3 window end was deactivated, and a fixed and short value was set in all patients throughout follow-up. AVS significantly increased from 68.7% ± 14.7% at 24-hour follow-up to 83.9% ± 7.4% at 1-month visit (P = .001). At 1-month visit, shorter A3 window end time (P = .019), higher A4 threshold (P = .011), and deactivation of the automatic A3 window (P = .054) were independently related to higher AVS. A total of 2,291,953 Holter-recorded cardiac cycles were analyzed. Median AVS during 24-hour daily activities was 87.6% (interquartile range 84.5%-90.6%). Twenty of 26 patients (79.6%) reached AVS ≥85% of cardiac cycles.High rates of AVS can be achieved in real-world patients undergoing leadless pacing. Manual reprogramming of the atrial sensing parameters is essential to optimize mechanically sensed atrial tracking.

Left bundle branch pacing is a physiological pacing modality with a low and stable threshold. The electrophysiological characteristics and mechanisms of bipolar pacing remain unclear.This study aimed to assess the electrophysiological characteristics of bipolar pacing of left bundle branch pacing and to infer the mechanisms underlying each electrocardiogram and electrogram waveform morphology.A total of 65 patients who strictly met the criteria for left bundle branch capture were enrolled. The changes in the morphology of the electrocardiogram and electrogram during the threshold testing with different outputs on unipolar and bipolar pacing were recorded. The electrophysiological characteristics were then analyzed.Four distinct morphologies and 3 different types of transitions during bipolar pacing threshold testing were identified; we labeled the 4 types of morphologies as nonselective (NS)-bipolar-left bundle (LB), NS-cathodal-LB, selective (S)-cathodal-LB, and left ventricular septal-cathodal. Except left ventricular septal-cathodal, the other 3 types (NS-bipolar-LB, NS-cathodal-LB, and S-cathodal-L) had a short and constant VWith a higher output on bipolar pacing, NS-bipolar-LB capture had the shortest V

Transcutaneous cardiac pacing (TCP) is a lifesaving procedure for patients with certain types of unstable bradycardia. We aimed to assess the difference in the pacing thresholds between the anteroposterior (AP) and anterolateral (AL) pacer pad positions. The second aim was to characterize the severity of chest wall muscle contractions during TCP.In this prospective crossover trial, we enrolled patients presenting to the electrophysiology laboratory for elective cardioversion. After successful cardioversion, sedated participants were sequentially paced in both positions. The study procedure concluded after successful capture or inability to achieve capture by 140 mA (the pacer's maximum output) in both positions. Pacing thresholds were compared between positions, using a student's paired t-test, assigning a value of 141 mA to any trials with non-capture.Forty-one patients were screened; 20 were enrolled in the study. Seven participants were excluded from the paired analysis (three were prevented from pacing in the second position at the anesthesiologist's discretion, and 4 did not capture in either position). The study population consisted of 14 men and 6 women with a median age of 65 years. The mean pacing threshold was 33 mA lower (P = 0.001, 95% CI 20-45) in the AP (93 mA) versus the AL (126 mA) position. The median contraction severity score was 3 in the AL position versus 4 in the AP position (P = 0.005).Placing pacer pads in the AP position requires less energy to capture. Major resuscitation guidelines may favor the AP position for TCP.gov Identifier: NCT03898050 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03898050.

Background. Pacemakers are used to treat syncope in patients with bradyarrhythmia; however, the risk of recurrent syncope has only been investigated in few and smaller studies. Objective. The aim of this study was to investigate the risk of recurrent syncope after pacemaker implantation in patients with bradyarrhythmia and prior syncope. Methods. This retrospective, population-based cohort study included patients with a prior syncope and implantation of a pacemaker using data from the Danish nationwide registers from 1996 to 2017. Cumulative incidence and cox regression was used to estimate the 5-year incidence and the risk of recurrent syncope, respectively. Results. In total, 11,126 patients (median age: 78 years, interquartile range: 69–85, 56% male) were included and the 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrent syncope was 19.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): 18.8–20.3%). Sinus node dysfunction (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.29, 95%CI: 1.17–1.42) and unspecified type of bradyarrhythmia (HR: 1.32, 95%CI: 1.15–1.52) were associated with an increased risk of syncope compared to advanced atrioventricular (AV) block. Male sex (HR: 1.22, 95%CI: 1.22–1.34), cerebrovascular disease (HR: 1.17, 95%CI: 1.05–1.30), and prior number of syncopes were significantly associated with a higher HR of recurrent syncope. Conclusion. Almost one-in-five patients with bradyarrhythmia and prior syncope who had a pacemaker implanted had a recurrent syncope within five years. A higher risk of syncope was observed among patients with sinus node dysfunction and unspecified type of bradyarrhythmia compared to AV block. Male sex, cerebrovascular disease, and prior number of syncopes were associated risk factors of recurrent syncope.

Aims Permanent transseptal left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a promising new pacing method for both bradyarrhythmia and heart failure indications. However, data regarding safety, feasibility and capture type are limited to relatively small, usually single centre studies. In this large multicentre international collaboration, outcomes of LBBAP were evaluated. Methods and results This is a registry-based observational study that included patients in whom LBBAP device implantation was attempted at 14 European centres, for any indication. The study comprised 2533 patients (mean age 73.9 years, female 57.6%, heart failure 27.5%). LBBAP lead implantation success rate for bradyarrhythmia and heart failure indications was 92.4% and 82.2%, respectively. The learning curve was steepest for the initial 110 cases and plateaued after 250 cases. Independent predictors of LBBAP lead implantation failure were heart failure, broad baseline QRS and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter. The predominant LBBAP capture type was left bundle fascicular capture (69.5%), followed by left ventricular septal capture (21.5%) and proximal left bundle branch capture (9%). Capture threshold (0.77 V) and sensing (10.6 mV) were stable during mean follow-up of 6.4 months. The complication rate was 11.7%. Complications specific to the ventricular transseptal route of the pacing lead occurred in 209 patients (8.3%). Conclusions LBBAP is feasible as a primary pacing technique for both bradyarrhythmia and heart failure indications. Success rate in heart failure patients and safety need to be improved. For wider use of LBBAP, randomized trials are necessary to assess clinical outcomes.

In dogs, single lead ventricular pacing, ventricular sensing, inhibition response, rate adaptive (VVIR) pacemakers are routinely used to treat third degree atrioventricular block. The objectives of this study were to investigate the heart rate distribution in dogs with VVIR pacemakers, and report changes when activity settings were adjusted.Eighteen client-owned dogs with VVIR pacemakers for third degree atrioventricular block.This observational study consisted of a review of medical records of dogs with VVIR pacemakers. For dogs with50% of paced beats at the lower pacing rate, the activity daily living (ADL) and exertion responses were increased. Re-evaluations were performed after 6-12 months.Heart rate distribution similar to healthy dogs was absent for all dogs. In nine dogs, the ADL and exertion responses were increased to the highest level. Of these, three dogs showed no improvement in heart rate distribution; for two dogs, one with an epicardial pacemaker, several activity settings were adjusted and pacing at higher heart rates was observed at re-evaluation. Four dogs died or were lost to follow-up. Clinical signs had resolved for all dogs after pacemaker implantation.Default activity settings of VVIR pacemakers do not result in heart rate distribution equivalent to healthy dogs. Increasing the ADL and exertion response settings to the highest levels did not improve the pacemaker rate response. Further investigations into the role of dog size, generator positioning, pacemaker settings, and whether rate responsiveness is required for dogs' quality and quantity of life are warranted.

To evaluate safety of leadless pacemaker implantation through the internal jugular vein in a larger cohort with longer follow-up. Moreover, feasibility of non-apical pacing as well as relation between pacing site and QRS duration were assessed.Eighty Two consecutive patients, who received a leadless pacemaker though the internal jugular vein, were included. Electrical parameters were measured at regular follow-up and any complications were registered. Paced QRS interval was compared for three pacing sites, RVOT, RV mid septum, and RV apical septum.In all patients, the leadless pacemaker was implanted successfully. In 69 patients, the device was implanted in a non-apical position. In 71% of cases, the device could be deployed at first attempt. The median fluoroscopy time was 4.4 min (range 0.9-51) The paced QRS interval was significantly narrower for non-apical pacing sites compared to apical pacing si 156 vs. 179 ms. p = .04, respectively. During mean follow-up of 16 months (range 0-43 months), electrical parameters remained stable. Two complications occurred, which could be resolved during the implant procedure. There were no access site related complications.The jugular approach for leadless pacemaker implantation is feasible and may avoid vascular complications. It facilitates non-apical positioning of leadless pacemakers leading to a narrower paced QRS interval. The jugular approach allows for immediate post procedural ambulation.

A 72-year-old man presented for routine dual chamber pacemaker interrogation 13 years following insertion for sick sinus syndrome. Increased noise, impedance and threshold of the right ventricular (RV) lead were identified. RV capture was maintained with an overall RV pacing burden of 47%. A routine generator replacement was scheduled alongside RV lead replacement. Fluoroscopy at the start of the procedure revealed an unexpected striking fracture of the RV pacing lead with complete separation of the proximal and distal portions within the RV. The patient was asymptomatic and described no predisposing factors. He underwent implantation of a new ventricular lead and generator and has remained well. This case demonstrates clear RV lead fracture as a late complication of pacemaker implantation despite maintained capture. This emphasises the need for a chest X-ray when a change in device parameters is noted at device interrogation even in the absence of symptoms.

An 88-year-old woman presented to our hospital due to an 18-hour history of worsening central chest pain. She had a dual-chamber pacemaker due to second-degree Mobitz type II atrioventricular block implanted 10 years ago. Her risk factors included hypertension and hypercholesterolaemia. Her

Leadless pacemakers (LPs) are emerging as alternative cardiac implantable devices for the treatment of bradyarrhythmia. This article aims to review the data behind the safety and efficacy of these devices while highlighting their pros and cons.Prospective non-randomized studies and registries have found that LPs are associated with lower rate of device-related complications mainly driven by lower need for lead-related interventions as compared to traditional pacemakers. On the other hand, cardiac perforation appears to occur more frequently with LPs. LPs are associated with lower rate of device-related complications as compared to the traditional pacemakers. However, the rate of pericardial effusion is higher and is more severe. As we transition to multi-chamber LPs, it is important to ensure the safety and efficacy of these devices.

Small studies have suggested left ventricular (LV) rapid pacing has similar safety and efficacy to conventional right ventricular (RV) rapid pacing in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, there are limited data on the comparative rates of tamponade. The study compared the rate of cardiac tamponade between LV and RV-pacing during TAVI.Between 2008 and 2021, 1226 consecutive patients undergoing transfemoral or transaxillary TAVI were included. 470(38.3%) patients had TAVI deployment with RV-pacing and 756(61.7%) with LV-pacing. The primary outcome was the frequency and cause of cardiac tamponade. Secondary outcomes included efficacy, procedure duration and crossover rates.There was a trend to less tamponade with LV-pacing, which did not reach statistical significance [11(2.3%) vs 11(1.5%);P = 0.27]. There was no significant difference in the frequency of tamponade due to annular tear [4(0.9%) vs 9(1.2%);P = 0.59] or LV free-wall perforation [1(0.2%) vs 2(0.3%);P = 0.86]. The frequency of tamponade due to RV perforation was significantly lower in the LV-pacing group [0 vs 6(2.3%);P 0.005)]. Two patients with tamponade due to RV perforation required emergency sternotomy of whom one died. Deployment success was similar (99% vs 99.6%;P=NS). Procedure duration was shorter with LV-pacing (70 vs 80 mins;P 0.005). Crossover to RV-pacing was low (0.9%). There were no embolizations caused by loss-of-capture in either group.LV-pacing appears equally efficacious and is associated with a lower risk of tamponade due to RV perforation caused by the temporary pacing wire. LV-pacing was not associated with an increased risk of tamponade due to LV free-wall perforation.

BACKGROUND Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) using bi-ventricular pacing (BVP) is effective in patients with heart failure, left bundle branch block (LBBB), and reduced left ventricular function. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has been reported as an alternative option for CRT. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and outcomes of LBBAP in patients who failed conventional BVP because of coronary venous (CV) lead complications or who were nonresponders to BVP. METHODS At 16 international centers, LBBAP was attempted in patients with conventional CRT indication who failed BVP because of CV lead complications or lack of therapeutic response to BVP. Heart failure hospitalization (HFH) and death, echocardiographic outcomes, procedural data, pacing parameters, and lead complications including CV lead failure are reported. RESULTS LBBAP was successfully performed in 200 patients (CV lead failures 156; nonresponders 44) (age 68 +/- 11 years; female 35%; LBBB 55%; right ventricular pacing 23%; ischemic cardiomyopathy 28%; nonischemic cardiomyopathy 63%; left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF]

Sequential synchronized atrioventricular (AV) pacing provides enhanced electrophysiologic parameters which contribute to improved hemodynamic parameters and increased cardiac performance to subsequently confer a clinical advantage over traditional ventricular pacing. Current temporary transvenous pacemaker catheters are limited to only one electrode which paces solely the right ventricle, thus lacking the capability to provide the optimal pacing mode. A new multilead pacemaker device was developed in response to the need for improved temporary pacing through the utilization of sequential synchronized atrioventricular pacing (TAVSP). It consists of seven preformed, preshaped nitinol wires electrodes, of which four are for intra-atrial and three for intraventricular positioning and endocardial contact, respectively. Each wire carries a ball tip designed to minimize tissue trauma and provide a high current density for adequate myocardial capture. The device is not yet Food and Drug Administration approved.To present the unique structural components and mechanical properties of a novel sequential synchronized AV pacing device for temporary insertion and to report its first-in-human application with an analysis of the early clinical experience.Following a process of development and proof of concept of the novel pacing modality in an animal model which demonstrated feasibility and safety, a series of patients who were candidates for the device application was identified. During left and right heart catheterization, the novel temporary pacing catheter was inserted transvenously and delivered in most patients under fluoroscopy or echocardiography. The catheter was deployed to its target right heart anatomic sites and then activated in an AV sequential mode. The technical aspects, the corresponding clinical utilization, and device performance were documented and analyzed.The series included 10 enrolled subjects. During planned left and right heart catheterization, the novel TAVSP device was inserted transvenously and then delivered and deployed successfully in a timely fashion in all patients. The pacing catheter achieved proper threshold and impedance in all (100%) patients. The performance of all ventricular leads was adequate; however, in 1 (10%) patient poor performance of the atrial leads was detected. The device was successfully retrieved in all patients. No adverse arrhythmia, impaired hemodynamics, or clinical adverse events occurred. No technical difficulties, component failure, or wires thrombosis were detected. All patients sustained the device application without sequala and were discharged home.Initial clinical experience with the utilization of a novel TAVSP demonstrates feasibility and safety in humans. The TAVSP modality potentially offers improved pacing capability and subsequent hemodynamic benefits over the current temporary pacing catheters. Further experience with the clinical application of this pacing catheter is warranted.

Implanting a ventricular demand leadless pacemaker (VVI-LPM) for patients with non-atrial fibrillation (AF) bradyarrhythmias such as sick sinus syndrome (SSS) or high-grade (i.e., second- or third-degree) atrioventricular (AV) block is not recommended unless they have limited vascular access or a high infection risk; nevertheless, an unexpectedly high number of VVI-LPM implantations have been performed. This study investigated the clinical outcomes of these unusual uses.Methods and Results:This study retrospectively analyzed 193 patients who were newly implanted with a VVI-LPM or an atrioventricular synchronous transvenous pacemaker (DDD-TPM) for non-AF bradyarrhythmias at a high-volume center in Japan from September 2017 to September 2020. Propensity score-matching produced 2 comparable cohorts treated with a VVI-LPM or DDD-TPM (n=58 each). Each group had 20 (34%) patients with SSS and 38 (66%) patients with high-grade AV block. During a median follow up of 733 (interquartile range 395-997) days, there were no significant differences between the VVI-LPM and DDD-TPM groups regarding late device-related adverse events (0% vs. 4%, log-rank P=0.155), but the VVI-LPM group had a significantly increased readmission rate for heart failure (HF) (29% vs. 2%, log-rank P=0.001) and a tendency to have higher all-cause mortality (28% vs. 4%, log-rank P=0.059).The implantation of a VVI-LPM for non-AF bradyarrhythmias increased the incidence of HF-related rehospitalization at the mid-term follow up compared to the use of a DDD-TPM.

The long-term implications of pacemaker insertion in younger adults are poorly described in the literature.We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive younger adult patients (18-50 yrs) undergoing pacemaker implantation at a quaternary hospital between 1986-2020. Defibrillators and cardiac resynchronisation therapy devices were excluded. All clinical records, pacemaker checks and echocardiograms were reviewed.Eighty-one (81) patients (median age 41.0 yrs IQR=35-47.0, 53% male) underwent pacemaker implantation. Indications were complete heart block (41%), sinus node dysfunction (33%), high grade AV block (11%) and tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome (7%). During a median 7.9 (IQR=1.1-14.9) years follow-up, nine patients (11%) developed 13 late device-related complications (generator or lead malfunction requiring reoperation [n=11], device infection [n=1] and pocket revision [n=1]). Five (5) of these patients were40 years old at time of pacemaker insertion. At long-term follow-up, a further nine patients (11%) experienced pacemaker-related morbidity from inadequate lead performance managed with device reprogramming. Sustained ventricular tachycardia was detected in two patients (2%). Deterioration in ventricular function (LVEF decline10%) was observed in 14 patients (17%) and seven of these patients required subsequent biventricular upgrade. Furthermore, four patients (5%) developed new tricuspid regurgitation (moderate-severe). Of 69 patients with available long-term pacing data, minimal pacemaker utilisation (pacing5% at all checks) was observed in 13 (19%) patients.Pacemaker insertion in younger adults has significant long-term implications. Clinicians should carefully consider pacemaker insertion in this cohort given risk of device-related complications, potential for device under-utilisation and issues related to lead longevity. In addition, patients require close follow-up for development of structural abnormalities and arrhythmias.

The present study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of the novel left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) procedure that uses isoelectric interval as an endpoint for lead implantation.A total of 41 patients with indications for pacing were enrolled. All patients underwent a novel LBBP procedure guided by recording an isoelectric interval as an endpoint for lead implantation. The procedural details and electrophysiological characteristics were then analyzed.A total of 38/41 (92.7%) cases were confirmed of left bundle branch (LBB) capture. An isoelectric interval was observed in 36/41 cases (87.8%). A total of 36/41 (87.8%) cases with LBB potential were observed. The mean unipolar LBBP threshold at the implant was 0.5 ± 0.2 V. The mean sensed amplitude of the R wave and the pacing impedance at the implant were 12.9 ± 5.0 mV and 723.5 ± 117.1 Ω. During the final threshold testing, a transition from non-selective to selective LBBP (S-LBBP) was demonstrated in 26 patients. A transition from non-selective LBBP (NS-LBBP) to left ventricular septal myocardial capture was observed in 12 patients.Using an isoelectric interval as an endpoint to guide the LBBP was feasible in a high proportion of captured LBB cases.

Transvenous pacemaker (PM) implantation is a complication in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Recently, a second generation of leadless PMs able of atrioventricular (AV) synchronous pacing has been introduced and could be an alternative when ventricular pacing is required after TAVI. Real-world data on Micra AV after TAVI are still lacking. Our aim was to determine the per- and post-procedural outcomes in patients with Micra AV leadless PM implantation after TAVI.A total of 20 consecutive patients underwent Micra AV leadless PM implantation after TAVI between November 2020 and June 2021.The main indication for ventricular pacing was high-degree AV block (55% of patients) and left bundle branch block (LBBB) associated with prolonged HV interval (45% of patients). At discharge, mean (SD) ventricular pacing threshold was 0.397 ± 0.11 V at 0.24 ms and ventricular impedance was 709.4 ± 139.1 Ω. At 1-month follow-up, 95% of patients were programmed in VDD pacing mode. Mean (SD) ventricular pacing threshold was 0.448 ± 0.094 V at 0.24 ms. In patients with ventriculargt; pacing gt; 90% (n = 5), mean AM-VP was 72.5% ± 8.3%. Pacing threshold at 1 month was not significantly different compared to discharge (p = .1088). Mean (SD) impedance was 631.0 ± 111.9 Ω, which remained stable at discharge (p = .0813). No procedural complications occurred during implantation. At 1-month follow-up, two patients displayed atrial under-sensing.Micra AV leadless PM implantation after TAVI is associated with a low complication rate and good device performance at 1-month post-implantation.

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has been performed exclusively using lumen-less pacing leads (LLL) with fixed helix design. This registry study explores the safety and feasibility of LBBAP using stylet-driven leads (SDL) with extendable helix design in a multicenter patient population. This study prospectively enrolled consecutive patients who underwent LBBAP for bradycardia pacing or heart failure indications at eight Belgian hospitals. LBBAP was attempted using SDL (Solia S60; Biotronik) delivered through dedicated delivery sheath (Selectra3D). Implant success, complications, procedural, and pacing characteristics were recorded at implant and follow-up. The study enrolled 353 patients (mean age 76 ± 39 years, 43% female). The mean number of implants per center was 25 (range: 5-162). Overall, LBBAP with SDL was successful in 334/353 (94%), varying from 93% to 100% among centers. Pacing response was labeled as left bundle branch pacing in 73%, whereas 27% were labeled as myocardial capture. Mean paced QRS duration and stimulus to left ventricular activation time measured 126 ± 21 ms and 74 ± 17. SDL-LBBAP resulted in low pacing thresholds (0.6 ± 0.4 V at 0.4 ms), which remained stable at 12 months follow-up (0.7 ± 0.3, p = .291). Lead revisions for SDL-LBBAP occurred in 5 (1.4%) patients occurred during a mean follow up of 9 ± 5 months. Five (1.4%) septal coronary artery fistulas and 8 (2%) septal perforations occurred, none of them causing persistent ventricular septal defects. The use of SDL to achieve LBBAP is safe and feasible, characterized by high implant success in low and high volume centers, low complication rates, and stable low pacing thresholds.

Although epicardial pacing wires are routinely inserted after cardiac surgical procedures, there is little in the medical literature to help standardise their use and identify associated risks and benefits. Much of the decision-making surrounding pacing wires are based on the surgeon's preference and vary highly between centers.A literature review was conducted exploring the evidence, indications, and current practice for temporary pacing wires. Risk factors for developing post-operative arrhythmias necessitating use of temporary pacing wires and complications were also reviewed.Although temporary epicardial pacing wires have a crucial role to play in the post-operative recovery period, the current literature suggests that they should be considered on an individual basis in all high-risk patients including increased age, low ejection fraction, diabetes mellitus, elevated pulmonary artery pressures, prolonged cross clamp time, pacing required to wean from bypass, pre-operative arrhythmia, and multiple valvular and transplant operations. Although complications from pacing wires are low, this figure is likely underreported and further studies are required to focus on the risks and benefits of insertion.

Following the recognition of the adverse effects of right ventricular pacing, alternative permanent pacing strategies aiming to maintain a synchronous ventricular contraction have been sought. The quest for the optimal pacing site has recently led to several promising and rapidly emerging new pacing strategies, such as left ventricular septal pacing and left bundle branch pacing. In both animal and human studies, these pacing strategies seem to maintain electrical and mechanical activation of the left ventricle to a (near)physiologic level. However, more studies on the long-term effects of both strategies are needed.

Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) provides electrical and mechanical synchrony at low and stable pacing output and effectively corrects distal conduction system disease. The criteria for differentiating LBBP from LV septal pacing has not been validated in large trials. There are several electrocardiography-based and intracardiac electrogram-based criteria to confirm LBB capture. In this section, the authors review these criteria and their overall accuracy.