The electrocardiographic characteristics of septal flash in patients with left bundle branch block

A Comparative Analysis of Apical Rocking and Septal Flash: Two Views of the Same Systole?

Heart failure (HF) is a complex medical condition characterized by both electrical and mechanical dyssynchrony. Both dyssynchrony mechanisms are intricately linked together, but the current guidelines for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) rely only on the electrical dyssynchrony criteria, such as the QRS complex duration. This possible inconsistency may result in undertreating eligible individuals who could benefit from CRT due to their mechanical dyssynchrony, even if they fail to fulfill the electrical criteria. The main objective of this literature review is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the practical value of echocardiography for the assessment of left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony using parameters such as septal flash and apical rocking, which have proven their relevance in patient selection for CRT. The secondary objectives aim to offer an overview of the relationship between septal flash and apical rocking, to emphasize the primary drawbacks and benefits of using echocardiography for evaluation of septal flash and apical rocking, and to offer insights into potential clinical applications and future research directions in this area. Conclusion: there is an opportunity to render resynchronization therapy more effective for every individual; septal flash and apical rocking could be a very useful and straightforward echocardiography resource.

Defining left bundle branch block according to the new 2021 European Society of Cardiology criteria

Correctly diagnosing left bundle branch block (LBBB) is fundamental, as LBBB occurs frequently in heart failure and may trigger a vicious cycle of progressive left ventricular dysfunction. Moreover, a correct diagnosis of LBBB is pivotal to guide cardiac resynchronisation therapy. Since the LBBB diagnostic criteria were recently updated by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), we assessed their diagnostic accuracy compared with the previous ESC 2013 definition. We further discuss the complexity of defining LBBB within the context of recent insights into the electromechanical pathophysiology of LBBB.

Aortic valve implantation-induced conduction block as a framework towards a uniform electrocardiographic definition of left bundle branch block

Introduction

New-onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) following transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement (LBBB_AVI) implies a proximal pathogenesis of LBBB. This study compares electrocardiographic characteristics and concordance with LBBB definitions between LBBB_AVI and non-procedure-induced LBBB controls (LBBB_control).

Methods

All LBBB_AVI patients at Ghent University Hospital between 2013 and 2019 were enrolled in the study. LBBB_AVI patients were matched for age, sex, ischaemic heart disease and ejection fraction to LBBB_control patients in a 1:2 ratio. For inclusion, a non-strict LBBB definition was used (QRS duration ≥ 120 ms, QS or rS in V1, absence of Q waves in V5-6). Electrocardiograms were digitally analysed and classified according to three LBBB definitions: European Society of Cardiology (ESC), Strauss and American Heart Association (AHA).

Results

A total of 177 patients (59 LBBB_AVI and 118 LBBB_control) were enrolled in the study. LBBB_AVI patients had more lateral QRS notching/slurring (100% vs 85%, p = 0.001), included a higher percentage with a QRS duration ≥ 130 ms (98% vs 86%, p = 0.007) and had a less leftward oriented QRS axis (−15° vs −30°, p = 0.013) compared to the LBBB_control group. ESC and Strauss criteria were fulfilled in 100% and 95% of LBBB_AVI patients, respectively, but only 18% met the AHA criteria. In LBBB_control patients, concordance with LBBB definitions was lower than in the LBBB_AVI group: ESC 85% (p = 0.001), Strauss 68% (p < 0.001) and AHA 7% (p = 0.035). No differences in electrocardiographic characterisation or concordance with LBBB definitions were observed between LBBB_AVI and LBBB_control patients with lateral QRS notching/slurring.

Conclusion

Non-uniformity exists among current LBBB definitions concerning the detection of proximal LBBB. LBBB_AVI may provide a framework for more consensus on defining proximal LBBB.

Supplementary Information

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12471-021-01565-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Presence of contractile impairment appears crucial for structural remodeling in idiopathic left bundle-branch block

BACKGROUND

To differentiate effects of ventricular asynchrony from an underlying hypocontractile cardiomyopathy this study aimed to enhance the understanding of functional impairment and structural remodeling in idiopathic left bundle-branch block (LBBB). We hypothesize, that functional asynchrony with septal flash volume effects alone might not entirely explain the degree of functional impairment. Hence, we suggest the presence of a superimposed contractile cardiomyopathy.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 53 patients with idiopathic LBBB were identified and matched to controls with and without cardiovascular risk factors. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) was used to evaluate cardiac function, volumes and myocardial fibrosis using native T1 mapping and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). Septal flash volume was assessed by CMR volumetric measurements and allowed to stratify patients with systolic dysfunction solely due to isolated ventricular asynchrony or superimposed contractile impairment.

RESULTS

Reduced systolic LV-function, increased LV-volumes and septal myocardial fibrosis were found in patients with idiopathic LBBB compared to healthy controls. LV-volumes increased and systolic LV-function declined with prolonged QRS duration. Fibrosis was typically located at the right ventricular insertion points. Subgroups with superimposed contractile impairment appeared with pronounced LV dilation and increased fibrotic remodeling compared to individuals with isolated ventricular asynchrony.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of superimposed contractile impairment in idiopathic LBBB is crucial to identify patients with enhanced structural remodeling. This finding suggests an underlying cardiomyopathy. Future studies are needed to assess a possible prognostic impact of this entity and the development of heart failure.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was retrospectively registered.

Progression of incomplete toward complete left bundle branch block: A clinical and electrocardiographic analysis

Background

Complete left bundle branch block (cLBBB) is associated with increased cardiovascular mortality and heart failure. On the contrary, the clinical relevance of incomplete left bundle branch block (iLBBB) is less known. This study investigated the profile and outcome of iLBBB patients and assessed the risk of progression to cLBBB.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with iLBBB between July 2013 and April 2018 were retrospectively included. Subsequently, echo‐ and electrocardiographic examinations at time of iLBBB diagnosis and during follow‐up, as well as progression to non‐strict cLBBB and strict cLBBB, were evaluated.

Results

The study enrolled 321 patients (33% female, age 74 ± 11 years). During the follow‐up of 21 (8;34) months, 33% of iLBBB patients evolved to non‐strict cLBBB and 27% to strict cLBBB. iLBBB patients who evolved to non‐strict or strict cLBBB were older, had more frequently reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, and had more often QRS notching/slurring in the lateral leads and inferior leads, compared to patients without progression to cLBBB. In multivariate analysis, only QRS notching/slurring in the lateral leads was independently associated with progression to non‐strict cLBBB (odds ratio 4.64, p < .001) and strict cLBBB (odds ratio 9.6, p < .001). iLBBB patients with QRS notching/slurring had a progression rate to non‐strict cLBBB of 52% and 49% to strict cLBBB.

Conclusion

Among patients with iLBBB, up to one third of the patients progress to cLBBB within a period of 2 years. The presence of QRS notching/slurring in the lateral leads during iLBBB was the strongest predictor for progression toward cLBBB.

Relation between electrical and mechanical dyssynchrony in patients with left bundle branch block: An electro- and vectorcardiographic study

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines select patients for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) mainly on electrocardiographic parameters like QRS duration and left bundle branch block (LBBB). However, among those LBBB patients, heterogeneity in mechanical dyssynchrony occurs and might be a reason for nonresponse to CRT. This study assesses the relation between electrocardiographic characteristics and presence of mechanical dyssynchrony among LBBB patients.

METHODS

The study included patients with true LBBB (including mid-QRS notching) on standard 12-lead electrocardiograms. Left bundle branch block-induced mechanical dyssynchrony was assessed by the presence of septal flash on two-dimensional echocardiography. Previously reported electro- and vectorcardiographic dyssynchrony markers were analyzed: global QRS duration (QRSD_LBBB ), left ventricular activation time (QRSD_LVAT ), time to intrinsicoid deflection (QRSD_ID ), and vectorcardiographic QRS areas in the 3D vector loop (QRSA_3D ).

RESULTS

The study enrolled 545 LBBB patients. Septal flash (SF) is present in 52% of patients presenting with true LBBB. Patients with SF are more frequent female, have less ischemic heart disease and smaller left ventricular dimensions. In multivariate analysis longer QRSD_LBBB , QRSD_LVAT and larger QRSA_3D were independently associated with SF. Of all parameters, QRSA_3D has the best accuracy to predict SF, although overall accuracy remains moderate (59% sensitivity, 58% specificity). The predictive value of QRSA_3D remained constant in both sexes, irrespective of ischemic heart disease, ejection fraction and even when categorizing for QRSD_LBBB .

CONCLUSION

In LBBB patients, large QRS areas correlate better with mechanical dyssynchrony compared to wide QRSD intervals. However, the overall accuracy to predict mechanical dyssynchrony by electrocardiographic dyssynchrony markers, even when using complex vectorcardiographic parameters, remains low.

Effect of septal flash on right ventricular systolic function in left bundle-branch block patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction

A leftward motion of the ventricular septum prior to ejection, known as the septal flash (SF), is frequently observed in patients with left bundle-branch block (LBBB). We investigated whether the abnormal motion of the ventricular septum affects right ventricle (RV) contractile performance in LBBB patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Forty-four patients with complete LBBB were selected using standard 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs), with 30 healthy individuals serving as controls. According to the presence of SF, patients with LBBB were allocated to two subgroups: those with SF (LBBB-SF, n = 24) and those without SF (LBBB-NSF, n = 20). RV longitudinal strain (LS) decreased in LBBB patients with preserved LVEF compared to control subjects (p = 0.002). And RV LS decreased significantly in LBBB-SF patients compared to NSF-LBBB patients (p = 0.04). RV LS correlated negatively with involved septal myocardial segments of SF (r = −0.36, p = 0.02), but did not correlate with the magnitude of SF. RV contractile performance deceased in LBBB patients with preserved LVEF. SF, particularly the extent of this phenomenon, may further affect RV contractile performance.