Surgical epicardial left ventricular lead versus coronary sinus lead placement in biventricular pacing☆

A multifunctional soft robot for cardiac interventions

In minimally invasive endovascular procedures, surgeons rely on catheters with low dexterity and high aspect ratios to reach an anatomical target. However, the environment inside the beating heart presents a combination of challenges unique to few anatomic locations, making it difficult for interventional tools to maneuver dexterously and apply substantial forces on an intracardiac target. We demonstrate a millimeter-scale soft robotic platform that can deploy and self-stabilize at the entrance to the heart, and guide existing interventional tools toward a target site. In two exemplar intracardiac procedures within the right atrium, the robotic platform provides enough dexterity to reach multiple anatomical targets, enough stability to maintain constant contact on motile targets, and enough mechanical leverage to generate newton-level forces. Because the device addresses ongoing challenges in minimally invasive intracardiac intervention, it may enable the further development of catheter-based interventions.

2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.

Long-Term Performance of Epicardial versus Transvenous Left Ventricular Leads for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Aims: to study the technical performance of epicardial left ventricular (LV) leads placed via video assisted thoracic surgery (VATS), compared to transvenously placed leads for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Methods: From 2001 until 2013, a total of 644 lead placement procedures were performed for CRT. In the case of unsuccessful transvenous LV lead placement, the patient received an epicardial LV lead. Study groups consist of 578 patients with a transvenous LV lead and 66 with an epicardial LV lead. The primary endpoint was LV-lead failure necessitating a replacement or deactivation. The secondary endpoint was energy consumption. Results: The mean follow up was 5.9 years (epicardial: 5.5 ± 3.1, transvenous: 5.9 ± 3.5). Transvenous leads failed significantly more frequently than epicardial leads with a total of 66 (11%) in the transvenous leads group vs. 2 (3%) in the epicardial lead group (p = 0.037). Lead energy consumption was not significantly different between groups. Conclusions: Epicardial lead placement is feasible, safe and shows excellent long-term performance compared to transvenous leads. Epicardial lead placement should be considered when primary transvenous lead placement fails or as a primary lead placement strategy in challenging cases.

2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.

Beyond Conventional Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy: A Review of Electrophysiological Options in the Management of Chronic Heart Failure

The incidence of heart failure (HF) continues to grow and burden our health care system. Electrophysiological aberrations are common amongst patients with heart failure and can contribute to worsening symptoms and prognosis. Targeting these abnormalities with cardiac and extra-cardiac device therapies and catheter ablation procedures augments cardiac function. Newer technologies aimed to improvement procedural outcomes, address known procedural limitations and target newer anatomical sites have been trialled recently. We review the role and evidence base for conventional cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) and its optimisation, catheter ablation therapies for atrial arrhythmias, cardiac contractility and autonomic modulation therapies.

Etiology and device therapy in complete atrioventricular block in pediatric and young adult population: Contemporary review and new perspectives

Complete atrioventricular block (CAVB) is a total dissociation between the atrial and ventricular activity, in the absence of atrioventricular conduction. Several diseases may result in CAVB in the pediatric and young-adult population. Permanent right ventricular (RV) pacing is required in permanent CAVB, when the cause is neither transient nor reversible. Continuous RV apical pacing has been associated with unfavorable outcomes in several studies due to the associated ventricular dyssynchrony. This study aims to summarize the current literature regarding CAVB in the pediatric and young adult population and to explore future treatment perspectives.

Nontransvenous Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Technology-A Review for the Anesthesiologist

There has been a recent shift in bradycardia pacing and defibrillation therapy to leadless pacemakers and extrathoracic cardioverter-defibrillator technology due to complications associated with transvenous devices. These innovations have implications for anesthesia care, as these novel devices have design and functionality features different from transvenous devices. Current perioperative guidelines do not address management of leadless pacemakers and the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, although implantation rates are increasing globally. This article addresses the features and capabilities of nontransvenous cardiac implantable electronic devices, such as the Micra and the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and provides guidance for perioperative management.

Long-term single-centre large volume experience with transseptal endocardial left ventricular lead implantation

Aims

The aim of our study was to investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of transseptal endocardial left ventricular lead implantation (TELVLI).

Methods and results

Transseptal endocardial left ventricular lead implantation was performed in 54 patients (44 men, median age 69, New York Heart Association III–IV stage) between 2007 and 2017 in a single centre. In 36 cases, the transseptal puncture (TP) was performed via the femoral vein, and in 18 cases, the TP and also the left ventricular (LV) lead placement were performed via the subclavian vein. An electrophysiological deflectable catheter was used to reach the LV wall through the dilated TP hole. The LV lead implantation was successful in all patients. A total of 54 patients were followed up for a median of 29 months [interquartile range (IQR) 8–40 months], the maximum follow-up time was 94 months. Significant improvement in the LV ejection fraction was observed at the 3-month visit, from the median of 27% (IQR 25–34%) to 33% (IQR 32–44%), P < 0.05. Early lead dislocation was observed in three cases (5%), reposition was performed using the original puncture site in all. The patients were maintained on anticoagulation therapy with a target international normalized ratio between 2.5 and 3.5. Four thromboembolic events were noticed during follow-up. A total of 27 patients died, with a median survival of 15 months (IQR 6–40).

Conclusion

The TELVLI is an effective approach for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) however it is associated with a substantial thromboembolic risk (7%).

Mini-invasive technique of implanting the first domestic wireless epicardial pacemaker with a MEMS-converter

This article describes a minimally invasive surgical technique for implanting the pacemaker with a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) converter of kinematic energy into electrical energy in patients with life-threatening rhythm disorders. This kind of technique is recommended for patients with cardiac pathology who are preparing for surgical treatment of the main pathology with simultaneous implantation of the pacemaker with MEMS-converter of kinematic energy into electrical energy. Implantation of the pacemaker should be performed in the most energy-efficient zone of the epicardium, determined in advance by the method of tissue echocardiography.

Outcome of video-assisted thoracoscopic implantation of epicardial left ventricular leads with visual targeting for cardiac resynchronization therapy

OBJECTIVES

Our goal was to analyse the implantation and outcome of thoracoscopic epicardial leads after a failed endovascular approach or follow-up (FU) complications after endovascular implantation.

METHODS

We reviewed the records of patients with failed endovascular left ventricular (LV) lead placement or complications during FU, who were subsequently referred to cardiac surgeons for treatment with thoracoscopic LV lead implantation. We analysed the reasons for endovascular failure; the indications for the surgical procedures; and the clinical, echocardiographic and device FU results.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2013, a total of 23 patients were included. Among them, 17 of the patients had no previous cardiothoracic surgery, 13 (76%) had successful video-assisted thoracoscopy (VAT) LV lead implantation, 3 (18%) had a conversion to thoracotomy and 1 (6%) failed. Of the 6 patients with prior cardiothoracic surgery, 2 (33%) had VAT only, 3 (50%) had primary thoracotomies and 1 (17%) had a conversion. Two major complications occurred. The reasons for LV endovascular lead failure were subclavian vein occlusion (n = 2), implant failure (n = 13) and complications during the FU period (n = 8). FU information was available for 20 patients: 17 (85%) had improved symptoms. The median FU period was 33 months. A total of 78% of patients were in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III-IV before the operation; 30% were in NYHA functional class III-IV at the last FU examination. The left ventricular ejection fraction increased from 25% before surgery to 31% at the last FU examination. Overall, sensing and pacing threshold values remained stable over time. In 1 patient, lead revision was necessary due to an increase in the pacing threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

VAT implantation of LV leads had an excellent response rate with an improvement in NYHA functional class and left ventricular ejection fraction. The lead measurements were mainly stable over time.

Fracture of an epicardial left ventricular lead implanted at open-heart surgery in anticipation of future need for cardiac resynchronization therapy

Epicardial left ventricular leads can be implanted at open-heart surgery for cardiac resynchronization therapy. We report a 2-year-old fractured epicardial left ventricular lead detected at generator implant. It highlights the importance of good surgical implant technique and of rigorous lead evaluation for signs of impending failure at generator implant.

Efficacy, Safety, and Performance of Isolated Left vs. Right Ventricular Pacing in Patients with Bradyarrhythmias: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Considering the potential deleterious effects of right ventricular (RV) pacing, the hypothesis of this study is that isolated left ventricular (LV) pacing through the coronary sinus is safe and may provide better clinical and echocardiographic benefits to patients with bradyarrhythmias and normal ventricular function requiring heart rate correction alone.

Objective

To assess the safety, efficacy, and effects of LV pacing using an active-fixation coronary sinus lead in comparison with RV pacing, in patients eligible for conventional pacemaker (PM) implantation.

Methods

Randomized, controlled, and single-blinded clinical trial in adult patients submitted to PM implantation due to bradyarrhythmias and systolic ventricular function ≥ 0.40. Randomization (RV vs. LV) occurred before PM implantation. The main results of the study were procedural success, safety, and efficacy. Secondary results were clinical and echocardiographic changes. Chi-squared test, Fisher's exact test and Student's t-test were used, considering a significance level of 5%.

Results

From June 2012 to January 2014, 91 patients were included, 36 in the RV Group and 55 in the LV Group. Baseline characteristics of patients in both groups were similar. PM implantation was performed successfully and without any complications in all patients in the RV group. Of the 55 patients initially allocated into the LV group, active-fixation coronary sinus lead implantation was not possible in 20 (36.4%) patients. The most frequent complication was phrenic nerve stimulation, detected in 9 (25.7%) patients in the LV group. During the follow-up period, there were no hospitalizations due to heart failure. Reductions of more than 10% in left ventricular ejection fraction were observed in 23.5% of patients in the RV group and 20.6% of those in the LV group (p = 0.767). Tissue Doppler analysis showed that 91.2% of subjects in the RV group and 68.8% of those in the LV group had interventricular dyssynchrony (p = 0.022).

Conclusion

The procedural success rate of LV implant was low, and the safety of the procedure was influenced mainly by the high rate of phrenic nerve stimulation in the postoperative period.

A combined epicardial implantation and subsequent extraction strategy in pacemaker device infection in pacemaker-dependent patients

INTRODUCTION

Treatment infections is challenging in pacemaker (PM) dependent patients. We proposed a novel implantation strategy for this group of patients.

METHODS

Patients who were PM dependent and were admitted with a PM infection received a combined procedure of left ventricular (LV) epicardial implantation of a PM lead and subsequent extraction of the infected system. No temporary pacing wire was used and the PM generator was placed in the left flank.

RESULTS

Between 2012 and 2015 we treated 16 patients who were PM dependent and with a PM infection. The majority of patients were male (81% [13/16]) and the median age was 71 years (50-91). The cause of infection was valvular endocarditis in 38% (6/16), lead infection in 25% (4/16), and isolated pocket infection in 38% (6/16). All patients underwent epicardial implantation of a LV lead (1084T bipolar lead; St. Jude Medical Myodex, St. Paul, MN, USA) and extraction of the infected device. There was no occurrence of periprocedural mortality and no postprocedural tamponades. There was one complication in the form of a hemorrhage at the infected device extraction site. In the median follow-up period of 17 months there were four of 16 deaths, none of which were attributable to epicardial LV implantation. LV-lead threshold was 1.1V (±0.7V) upon implantation that increased to 1.2V (±0.6V) at 0.4-ms pulse duration. There were no reinfections of the epicardial lead or device.

CONCLUSION

Epicardial left ventricle PM implantation and subsequent extraction of an infected PM in PM-dependent patients is feasible and safe with good long-term outcome.

Epicardial left ventricular leads via minimally invasive technique: a role of steroid eluting leads

Background

We retrospectively assessed two types of sutureless screw-in left ventricular (LV) leads (steroid eluting vs. non-steroid eluting) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantation with regards to their electrical performance.

Methods

Between March 2008 and May 2014 an epicardial LV lead was implanted in 32 patients after failed transvenous LV lead placement using a left-sided lateral minithoracotomy or video-assisted thoracoscopy (mean age 64 ± 9 years). Patients were divided into two groups according to the type of implanted lead. Steroid eluting (SE) group: 21 patients (Myodex™ 1084 T; St. Jude Medical) and non-steroid eluting (NSE) group: 11 patients (MyoPore® 511,212; Greatbatch Medical).

Results

All epicardial leads could be placed successfully, without any intraoperative complications or mortality. With regard to the implanted lead following results were observed: sensing (mV): SE 8.8 ± 6.1 vs. NSE 10.1 ± 5.3 (p = 0.380); pacing threshold (V@0.5 ms): SE 1.0 ± 0.5 vs. NSE 0.9 ± 0.5 (p = 0.668); impedance (ohms): SE 687 ± 236 vs. NSE 790 ± 331 (p = 0.162). At the follow-up (2.6 ± 1.9 years) the following results were seen: sensing (mV): SE 8.7 ± 5.0 vs. NSE 11.2 ± 6.6 (p = 0.241), pacing threshold (V@0.5 ms): SE 1.4 ± 0.5 vs. NSE 1.0 ± 0.3 (p = 0.035), impedance (ohms): SE 381 ± 95 vs. NSE 434 ± 88 (p = 0.129).

Conclusions

Based on the results no strong differences have been found between the both types of epicardial LV leads (steroid eluting vs. non-steroid eluting) in CRT implantation in short- and midterm.

Surgical placement of left ventricular lead for cardiac resynchronisation therapy after failure of percutaneous attempt

Objective

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy has been shown to be an effective treatment to improve functional status and prolong survival of patients in advanced chronic heart failure. This study assessed the surgical outcomes of left anterior mini-thoracotomy for the implantation of left ventricular epicardial pacing leads in cardiac resynchronisation therapy.

Methods

Our study consisted of 30 consecutive patients who underwent cardiac resynchronisation therapy with a left thoracotomy between November 2010 and April 2012 in our clinic. Postoperative follow up included the assessment of New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, electrocardiography and echocardiography.

Results

There were 22 male and eight female patients with a mean age of 68 ± 5.04 years. All patients were in NYHA class III or IV. Pre-procedure mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 28.1 ± 4.5% and post-procedural ejection fraction improved to 31.7 ± 5.1%. The pre-operative QRS duration changed from 171.7 ± 10.8 to 156.2 ± 4.4 ms after the operation. Also there was a significant reduction in left ventricular end-diastolic dimension from 6.98 ± 0.8 to 6.72 ± 0.8 mm (p < 0 .05), but no change in left ventricular end-systolic dimension and severity of mitral regurgitation. All patients had successful surgical left ventricular lead placement. There was no procedure-related mortality. The mean follow-up time was 40.4 months.

Conclusion

Surgical epicardial left ventricular lead placement procedure is a safe and effective technique in patients with a failed percutaneous attempt.

Robotic-Assisted Left Ventricular Lead Placement

Robot-assisted left ventricular lead implantation for cardiac resynchronization therapy is a feasible and safe technique with superior visualization, dexterity, and precision to target the optimal pacing site. The technique has been associated with clinical response and beneficial reverse remodeling comparable with the conventional approach via the coronary sinus. The lack of clinical superiority and a residual high nonresponder rate suggest that the appropriate clinical role for the technique remains as rescue therapy.

Long-Term Follow-Up of Isolated Epicardial Left Ventricular Lead Implant Using a Minithoracotomy Approach for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

BACKGROUND

Transvenous left ventricular (LV) lead placement for cardiac resynchronization therapy is unsuccessful in 5-10% of reported cases. These patients may benefit from isolated surgical placement of an epicardial LV lead via minithoracotomy approach.

AIM

To evaluate the success of this approach at long-term follow-up.

METHODS

Retrospective evaluation of all consecutive patients undergoing isolated epicardial LV lead placement after failed transvenous attempt over a 6-year period. Data collected on baseline parameters, procedural details, and outcome at follow-up (hospital stay, complications, mortality, and clinical response).

RESULTS

Forty-two patients underwent epicardial lead implant. Five died within 1 year (11.9%): two (4.8%) died within 30-days post op (one from intraoperative hemorrhage, the other from multiple organ failure); 39 (95.1%) were admitted to the high dependency unit and transferred to the ward <24 hours. Median hospital stay was 3.4 ± 1.9 days. The overall complication rate was 17.5% (n = 7): 15.0% (n = 6) short term and 2.5% (n = 1) long term; these included three (7.5%) LV noncapture events all treated with reprogramming. There were two (5.0%) wound infections requiring oral antibiotics and two (5.0%) device infections requiring intravenous antibiotics (one had device resiting, the other developed septic shock requiring intensive care admission). Assessment of clinical response was possible in 34 (81.0%) at follow-up: 21 (61.8%) were responders and 13 (28.2%) nonresponders with no significant differences between these groups; no clinical predictors of response were identified.

CONCLUSION

Isolated epicardial LV lead implant using minithoracotomy is relatively safe and effective at successful LV pacing. Response rate and postoperative recovery at long-term follow-up are reasonable in these high-risk patients.

Surgical Aspects of Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy

Despite significant advances in the pharmacological treatment of heart failure, rates of mortality and morbidity from the condition remain a concern. The introduction of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) has been a welcome addition to the treatment strategy of patients who display ventricular dyssynchrony. Several control studies have shown significant benefits from this intervention in particular improved mortality and reduction in symptom burden. In this short review, we focus on several concepts of CRT and discuss the implications of surgical implantation of the left ventricular (LV) lead as compared to the standard transvenous approach.

Alternative to left ventricular lead implantation through the coronary sinus: 1-year experience with a minimally invasive and robotically guided approach

AIMS

Left ventricular (LV) lead implantation through the coronary sinus (CS) can be limited and sometimes not possible-alternative approaches are needed. Minimally invasive, robotically guided LV lead implantation has major advantages, but there are little published data about the short- and long-term follow-ups, in terms of feasibility, safety, electrical performance, and impact on clinical outcome.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 21 heart failure patients underwent robotically guided LV lead implantation using the Da Vinci Robotic System. Indications were failed implant with conventional approach through the CS (n = 16) and non-response to conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (n = 5). During the procedure, the entire LV free wall was exposed through 3 transthoracic ports (10 mm diameter each) allowing ample choice of stimulation site and the ability to implant 2 LV leads via a Y connector. Patients were prospectively followed up for 1 year. The two LV leads were successfully implanted in all patients. No peri-procedural complications were observed. After a mean stay in the intensive care unit of 1.2 ± 4 days, the 21 patients were hospitalized in the EP department for 6.7 ± 2.9 days. Acute LV thresholds were excellent (1.0 V ± 0.6/0.4 ms) and stayed stable at 1-year follow-up (1.5 V ± 0.6/0.4 ms, P = 0.21). Four patients demonstrated an increased threshold (>2 V/0.4 ms). There was no phrenic nerve stimulation. After 12 months, in the failed implant group, 69% of the patients were echocardiographic and clinical responders.

CONCLUSION

The robotic approach was feasible, safe, and minimally invasive. Accordingly, robotically guided LV lead implantation seems to offer a new alternative when conventional approaches are not suitable.

Robotic-Assisted Left Ventricular Lead Placement

Robot-assisted left ventricular lead implantation for cardiac resynchronization therapy is a feasible and safe technique with superior visualization, dexterity, and precision to target the optimal pacing site. The technique has been associated with clinical response and beneficial reverse remodeling comparable with the conventional approach via the coronary sinus. The lack of clinical superiority and a residual high nonresponder rate suggest that the appropriate clinical role for the technique remains as rescue therapy.

Seven years of use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapies: a nationwide population-based assessment of their effectiveness in real clinical settings

Background

The efficacy of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) therapy has already been established in clinical trials but their effectiveness in several clinical settings remains undetermined. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of ICD and CRT-D therapies within the Brazilian National Health System (SUS).

Methods

All patients who underwent ICD or CRT-D implantation within the SUS from 2001 to 2007 were included in the study. We compared estimated Kaplan-Meier survival curves using the Peto’s test. Prognostic factors were selected using Cox’s models.

Results

There were included 3,295 patients in the ICD group and 681 patients in the CRT-D group. Cardiac causes accounted for 79% of all deaths in both groups and Chagas’ heart disease accounted for 31% of these deaths. In the CRT-D group, survival significantly decreased around the fourth year of follow-up, with a decrease from 59.5% to 38.3% in 5.5 months. Transvenous implantation technique was used in 62% of CRT-D patients. In-hospital case-fatality rates were higher in those undergoing surgical implantation (5.3%) than those undergoing transvenous implantation (1.6%) (p = 0.02).

Conclusions

The results show that short-term, medium-term and long-term effectiveness of ICD therapy appears to be similar to that evidenced in clinical trials. In the CRT-D group, in-hospital case-fatality and 30-day case-fatality were higher than those reported in other studies. Surgical epicardial implantation technique was performed in this group at a higher frequency than that reported in the literature and was associated with poorer short-term prognosis.

Right ventricular septal pacing as alternative for failed left ventricular lead implantation in cardiac resynchronization therapy candidates

AIMS

To compare the effects on left ventricular (LV) function of right ventricular (RV) septal pacing vs. cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients with an indication for the latter. Cardiac resynchronization therapy is an effective therapy in patients with drug-refractory heart failure. Despite advances in implantation techniques, LV lead placement can be impossible in up to 10% of cases. We, therefore, assessed the effects of RV septal pacing from mid septum (RVmIVS) and outflow tract (RVOT) on cardiac performance, in comparison with CRT.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Twenty-two patients scheduled for CRT underwent dual-chamber temporary pacing. The ventricular lead was placed at the RV apex (RVA), RVmIVS, and RVOT in random order. Comprehensive echocardiography was performed in a baseline AAI mode and then at each RV position in dual chamber pacemaker function (D pacing, D sensing, D dual responses) mode and repeated on the next day following CRT implantation. Right ventricular apex pacing did not change any of the assessed echocardiography parameters. Both RVmIVS and RVOT pacing increased LV ejection fraction (EF): 29 ± 7% at baseline vs. 32 ± 6% (P = 0.02) and 32 ± 5% (P = 0.04) with RVmIVS and RVOT pacing, respectively. Similarly, the dyssynchrony index (Ts-SD) decreased: 50 ± 19 ms at baseline vs. 39 ± 17 ms (P = 0.04) and 37 ± 17 ms (P = 0.006) with RVmIVS and RVOT pacing, respectively. Cardiac resynchronization therapy further improved LVEF and Ts-SD to 36 ± 7% and 34 ± 15 ms, respectively, however, only LVEF was significantly higher compared with RVmIVS and RVOT pacing (P = 0.03 and P = 0.01 respectively). There were no significant differences in either LVEF or Ts-SD between RVmIVS and RVOT.

CONCLUSION

Right ventricular septal pacing from mid septum or RVOT pacing improves LVEF and LV synchrony in CRT candidates. Further improvement in LVEF was achieved by CRT, which remains the 'gold standard' therapy in these patients. However, RV septal pacing is worthy of further study as an alternative strategy when LV lead implantation fails.

Thoracoscopic Epicardial Lead Implantation as an Alternative to Failed Endovascular Insertion for Cardiac Pacing and Resynchronization Therapy

Objective

Numerous anomalies or postprocedural stricture of the venous system prevent optimal endovascular implantation of a pacing lead in more than 10% of patient indicated for permanent pacing or cardiac resynchronization therapy. The purpose of this report was to summarize our experience and immediate postoperative results of thoracoscopic lead implantation as a lesser invasive solution to an unsuccessful endovascular lead insertion.

Methods

From January 2008 to April 2013, 11 epicardial leads were introduced thoracoscopically at our center as a rescue treatment after failed endovascular attempts. Patients were ventilated using a double-lumen endotracheal tube. A 5-mm 30-degree lance thoracoscope was used with either 2 or 3 additional working ports. A screw-in pacing lead (Medtronic Model 5071 Pacing lead, Minneapolis, MN USA) was inserted into the left ventricular epicardium. After the lead placement and assessment for threshold less than 1 V, the lead was brought to the chest wall and tunneled to the pacemaker generator pocket. At the end of the procedure, a small, flexible 14F thoracic drain, was left inside the pleural cavity for the next 24 hours.

Results

There were no mortality or any major surgical complications among these patients. All patients responded to the epicardial lead implantation in terms of appropriate pacing and conductivity. No clinical failure was observed, and no patient required a repeat procedure.

Conclusions

Thoracoscopic lead insertion is safe and easy to perform. We believe it should be offered as the first choice after failed endovascular pacing lead implantation.

High-density epicardial activation mapping to optimize the site for video-thoracoscopic left ventricular lead implant

Background

The left ventricular (LV) lead local electrogram (EGM) delay from the beginning of the QRS complex (QLV) is considered a strong predictor of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy. We have developed a method for fast epicardial QLV mapping during video-thoracoscopic surgery to guide LV lead placement.

Methods

A three-port, video-thoracoscopic approach was used for LV free wall epicardial mapping and lead implantation. A decapolar electrophysiological catheter was introduced through one port and systematically attached to multiple accessible LV sites. The pacing lead was targeted to the site with maximum QLV. The LV free wall activation pattern was analyzed in 16 pre-specified anatomical segments.

Results

We implanted LV leads in 13 patients with LBBB or IVCD. The procedural and mapping times were 142 ± 39 minutes and 20 ± 9 minutes, respectively. A total of 15.0 ± 2.2 LV segments were mappable with variable spatial distribution of QLV-optimum. The QLV ratio (QLV/QRSd) at the optimum segment was significantly higher (by 0.17 ± 0.08, p < 0.00001) as compared to an empirical midventricular lateral segment. The LV lead was implanted at the optimum segment in 11 patients (at an adjacent segment in 2 patients) achieving a QLV ratio of 0.82 ± 0.09 (range 0.63–0.93) and 99.5 ± 0.6% match with intraprocedural mapping.

Conclusion

Video-thoracoscopic LV lead implantation can be effectively and safely guided by epicardial QLV mapping. This strategy was highly successful in targeting the selected LV segment and resulted in significantly higher QLV ratios compared to an empirical midventricular lateral segment.

Automatic implantable cardiac defibrillator implantation may precipitate effort-induced thrombosis in young athletes: a case report and literature review

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a common finding after implantation of an automatic implantable cardiac defrillator (AICD). We describe the case of a patient who developed a left upper extremity DVT 4.5 months after implantation of an AICD and was found to have a lead-induced stenosis with possible underlying Paget-Schroetter syndrome (PSS) in the midbrachiocephalic vein on venography. While his symptoms resolved after the combination of pharmacomechanical thrombolysis, angioplasty, and anticoagulation, his long-term management is complicated by the presence of both PSS and lead-induced stenosis. Herein, we discuss his presentation, treatment, and future management options.

The effect of concomitant cardiac resynchronization therapy on quality of life in patients with heart failure undergoing cardiac surgery

Objectives:

To evaluate the effect of concomitant cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) on health related quality of life (QoL) in patients with heart failure (HF) and ventricular dyssynchrony undergoing cardiac surgery.

Methods:

Twenty-eight patients received permanent epicardial CRT in connection to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and/or aortic valve replacement (AVR) (CRT group). Thirty-seven HF patients without concomitant CRT served as a comparison group (non-CRT group). SF-36 was used to assess QoL in the two groups and was also compared with the general Swedish population.

Results:

The median follow-up time was 28 months after surgery (range 8 to 44 months). No difference in QoL could be shown between the CRT group and the comparison group. Several subscales of QoL in the CRT group were in range with the general Swedish population.

Conclusion:

Concomitant CRT for patients with HF and ventricular dyssynchrony undergoing CABG and/or AVR did not result in a higher estimated QoL compared to HF patients without CRT.

Direct transapical implantation of an endocardial pacing lead to the left ventricle: an alternate pacing site after tricuspid valve replacement

In this paper, we report an alternative approach for implantation of ventricular pacing lead for complete atrioventricular block after tricuspid valve replacement.

Surgical therapy for heart failure

Today's healthcare delivery system is challenged with an escalating number of heart failure patients who have exhausted medical therapy and overwhelmed the limits of organ transplantation. Scientific and technological advances over the last 20 years have now brought new surgical options to this vast patient population, ranging from ventricular restoration surgery to surgical gene therapy and beyond. This article reviews the myriad of surgical options that are available to these patients, their benefits and shortcomings, as well as potential future directions.

Canadian Cardiovascular Society guidelines on the use of cardiac resynchronization therapy: implementation

Recent studies have provided the impetus to update the recommendations for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). This article provides guidance on the implementation of CRT and is intended to serve as a framework for the implementation of CRT within the Canadian health care system and beyond. These guidelines were developed through a critical evaluation of the existing literature, and expert consensus. The panel unanimously adopted each recommendation. The 9 recommendations relate to patient selection in the presence of comorbidities, delivery and optimization of CRT, and resources required to deliver this therapy. The strength of evidence was weighed, taking full consideration of any risk of bias, and any imprecision, inconsistency, and indirectness of the available data. The strength of each recommendation and the quality of evidence were adjudicated. Trade-offs between desirable and undesirable consequences of alternative management strategies were considered, as were values, preferences, and resource availability. These guidelines were externally reviewed by experts, modified based on those reviews, and will be updated as new knowledge is acquired.

Prophylactic epicardial left ventricular lead implantation for biventricular pacing during operations

BACKGROUND

Surgical epicardial left ventricular (LV) lead implantation for biventricular pacing has advantages over the transvenous approach in cardiac surgical patients. We investigated the benefit of concomitant prophylactic LV lead implantation during open heart operations and subsequent lead performance after patients with impaired LV function receive a biventricular device.

METHODS

Retrospective data of 4,844 patients undergoing cardiac operations through a sternotomy between January 2001 and December 2011 were analyzed. Of these, 380 patients (7.8%) had severe impairment of LV function (contrast left ventriculogram showing grade 4 estimated ejection fraction or echocardiogram showing LV ejection fraction<0.30). LV lead implantation was performed in patients in whom recovery of LV function was unlikely. Lead performance data were collected at follow-up.

RESULTS

LV lead implantation occurred in 95 patients (25%), and 29 (30.5%) subsequently received a biventricular device. Of patients with impaired LV function, more patients with prophylactic LV leads underwent biventricular implant than those without LV leads (30.5% vs 1.1%, p<0.0001). The median interval from LV lead implantation to connection to a biventricular device was 30 days (interquartile range, 5.5 to 145 days). At a median follow-up of 437.5 days (interquartile range, 13.8 to 1198 days), the mean pacing threshold (1.25±0.46 vs 1.58±0.66 volts, p=0.069) and impedance (383.81±70.33 vs 448.6±200.1 Ohms, p=0.168) remained stable compared with time of biventricular device connection.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant proportion of patients with poor LV function undergoing cardiac operations may benefit from concomitant LV lead implantation. Subsequent lead performance appears satisfactory. Epicardial LV lead placement is easily accomplished during open heart operations and should be considered before the operation.

Thoracoscopic left ventricular lead implantation in cardiac resynchronization therapy

Cardiac resynchronization therapy is known to reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with advanced heart failure as a result of dyssynchrony and systolic dysfunction of the left ventricle. Placement of the left ventricular (LV) lead via the coronary sinus can be difficult. When LV lead implantation is difficult, a video-assisted epicardial approach can be a good alternative. Although there are several reports of video-assisted epicardial LV lead implantation, mini-thoracotomy and lead implantation under direct vision have been used in most series. A 49-yr-old woman with dilated cardiomyopathy underwent the video-assisted epicardial LV lead implantation because percutaneous transvenous approach was difficult due to small cardiac veins. The patient was discharged without problems and showed improved cardiac function at the 3 follow-up months. We report the first successful total thoracoscopic LV lead implantation (without mini-thoracotomy) in Korea.

Left ventricular endocardial pacing in cardiac resynchronisation therapy: Moving from bench to bedside

In cardiac resynchronisation therapy, failure to implant a left ventricular lead in a coronary sinus branch has been reported in up to 10% of cases. Although surgical insertion of epicardial leads is considered the standard alternative, this is not without morbidity and technical limitations. Endocardial left ventricular pacing can be an alternative as it has been associated with a favourable acute haemodynamic response compared with epicardial pacing in both animal and human studies. In this paper, we discuss left ventricular endocardial pacing and compare it with epicardial surgical implantation. Ease of application and procedural complications and morbidity compare favourably with epicardial surgical techniques. However, with limited experience, the most important concern is the still unknown long-term risk of thromboembolic complications. Therefore, for now endovascular implants should remain reserved for severely symptomatic heart failure patients and patients at high surgical risk of failed coronary sinus implantation.

Optimizing electrode placement for hemodynamic benefit in cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

Research is needed to explore the relative benefits of alternative electrode placements in biventricular and left ventricular (LV) pacing for heart failure with left bundle branch block (LBBB).

METHODS

A fast computational model of the left ventricle, running on an ordinary laptop computer, was created to simulate the spread of electrical activation over the myocardial surface, together with the resulting electrocardiogram, segmental wall motion, stroke volume, and ejection fraction in the presence of varying degrees of mitral regurgitation. Arbitrary zones of scar and blocked electrical conduction could be modeled.

RESULTS

Simulations showed there are both sweet spots and poor spots for LV electrode placement, sometimes separated by only a few centimeters. In heart failure with LBBB, pacing at poor spots can produce little benefit or even reduce pumping effectiveness. Pacing at sweet spots can produce up to 35% improvement in ejection fraction. Relatively larger benefit occurs in dilated hearts, in keeping with the greater disparity between early and late activated muscle. Sweet spots are typically located on the basal to midlevel, inferolateral wall. Poor spots are located on or near the interventricular septum. Anteroapical scar with conduction block causes little shift in locations for optimal pacing. Hearts with increased passive ventricular compliance and absence of preejection mitral regurgitation exhibit greater therapeutic gain. The durations and wave shapes of QRS complexes in the electrocardiogram can help predict optimum electrode placement in real time.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences between poor responders and hyperresponders to cardiac resynchronization therapy can be understood in terms of basic anatomy, physiology, and pathophysiology. Computational modeling suggests general strategies for optimal electrode placement. In a given patient heart size, regional pathology and regional dynamics allow individual pretreatment planning to target optimal electrode placement.

Thoracoscopic patch insulation to correct phrenic nerve stimulation secondary to cardiac resynchronization therapy

AIMS

Cardiac resynchronization therapy is an established therapy for heart failure, improving quality of life and prognosis. Despite advances in technique, available leads and delivery systems, trans-venous left ventricular (LV) lead positioning remains dependent on the patient's underlying venous anatomy. The left phrenic nerve courses over the surface of the pericardium laterally and may be stimulated by the LV pacing lead, causing uncomfortable diaphragmatic twitch. This paper describes a video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) procedure to correct phrenic nerve stimulation secondary to cardiac resynchronization therapy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Most current ways of avoiding phrenic stimulation involve either electronic reprogramming to distance the phrenic nerve from the stimulation circuit or repositioning the lead. We describe a case where the phrenic nerve was surgically insulated from the stimulating current by insinuating a patch of bovine pericardium between the epicardium and native pericardium of the heart thus completely resolving previously intolerable and incessant diaphragmatic twitch. The procedure was performed under general anaesthesia with single-lung ventilation and minimal use of neuromuscular blocking agents. Surgical patch insulation of the phrenic nerve was performed using minimally invasive VATS surgery, as a short-stay procedure, with no complications. No diaphragmatic twitch occurred post-surgery and the patient continued to gain symptomatic benefit from cardiac synchronization therapy (New York Heart Association Class III to II), enabling return to work.

CONCLUSIONS

In cases where the trans-venous position of a LV lead is limited by troublesome phrenic nerve stimulation, thoracoscopic surgical patch insulation of the phrenic nerve could be considered to allow beneficial cardiac resynchronization therapy.