A new and reliable method of individual ventricular capture identification during biventricular pacing threshold testing

Electrocardiography of cardiac resynchronization therapy: Pitfalls and practical tips

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been established as an effective mode of therapy in patients with heart failure and concurrent cardiac dyssynchrony, principally in the form of left bundle branch block (LBBB). The widespread use of CRT has ushered in a new landscape in 12-lead electrocardiography (ECG). ECG readings in these patients are most important to guide troubleshooting and also appropriate device programming, as well as discerning and managing nonresponders. A set of four ECG recordings need to accompany each patient with a CRT device, including a baseline ECG and recordings from monochamber (right and left ventricular) and biventricular pacing, which can be compared against a new recording to facilitate the evaluation of proper versus problematic biventricular pacing. Precordial ECG leads V1/2 acquired at the fourth intercostal space and limb leads, I and III, together with a quick assessment of perpendicular leads I and aVF to determine the quadrant of the QRS axis in the hexaxial diagram, may provide the framework for proper ECG interpretation in these patients. This important issue of 12-lead ECG in CRT patients is herein reviewed, pitfalls are pointed out and practical tips are provided for ECG reading to help recognize and manage problems with CRT device function. Furthermore, several pertinent ECG recordings and tabulated data are provided, and an algorithm is suggested that integrates prior algorithms and relevant information from current literature.

The roles of the Q (q) wave in lead I and QRS frontal axis for diagnosing loss of left ventricular capture during cardiac resynchronization therapy

INTRODUCTION

Loss of left ventricular (LV) capture may lead to deterioration of heart failure in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Recognition of loss of LV capture in time is important in clinical practice.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 422 electrocardiograms were acquired and analyzed from 53 CRT patients at 8 different pacing settings (LV only, right ventricle [RV] only, biventricular [BV] pacing with LV preactivation of 60, 40, 20, and 0 milliseconds and RV preactivation of 20 and 40 milliseconds). A modified Ammann algorithm by adding a third step-presence of Q (q, or QS) wave-to the original 2-step Ammann algorithm and a QRS axis shift method were devised to identify the loss of LV capture. The accuracy of modified Ammann algorithm was significantly higher than that of Ammann algorithm (78.9% vs. 69.1%, P < 0.001). The accuracy of the axis shift method was 66.4%, which was significantly lower than the modified Ammann algorithm (P < 0.001) and similar to the original one (P = 0.412). However, in the ECGs with QRS axis shift, 96.8% were correctly classified. LV preactivation or simultaneous BV activation and LV lead positioned in nonposterior or noninferior wall could elevate the accuracies of the modified Ammann algorithm and the QRS axis shift method.

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of the modified Ammann algorithm is greatly improved. The QRS axis shift method can help diagnose LV capture. The LV preactivation, or simultaneous BV activation and LV lead positioned in nonposterior or noninferior wall can increase the diagnostic power of the modified Ammann algorithm and QRS axis shift method.

Innovations in the development of cardiac resynchronization therapy devices with defibrillation capability-the Boston Scientific experience

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been clinically proven to improve symptoms, exercise capacity, and quality of life and promote reduction in ventricular dimensions. When combined with a defibrillator (CRT-D), significant reductions in all-cause mortality alone and in combination with cause-specific hospitalization have also been demonstrated. We trace Boston Scientific Corporation's experience in the development of CRT-D devices from the first human implant worldwide 10 years ago using transthoracic lead technology, through the clinical studies that led to regulatory approval using transvenous leads and pulse generators with features specifically designed for heart failure patients. We conclude with innovations for CRT-D that are currently under study.

Diagnostic Value of the 12-Lead Electrocardiogram during Conventional and Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization

The paced 12-lead ECG is a valuable tool in the assessment of patients with pacemakers, and ideally should be recorded routinely at the time of implantation and during follow-up. It has become particularly important in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization. The multiplicity of clinical situations described in this review highlight the pitfalls of using a single ECG lead in the overall evaluation of pacemaker patients. The design of programmers capable of registering a 12-lead ECG would obviate the need of an additional electrocardiograph and encourage the routine recording of the paced 12-lead ECG with each patient encounter. Such an arrangement would improve the care of pacemaker patients.

Electrocardiographic follow-up of biventricular pacemakers

Multisite pacing for the treatment of heart failure has added a new dimension to the electrocardiographic evaluation of device function. During left ventricular (LV) pacing from the appropriate site in the coronary venous system, a correctly positioned lead V1 registers a right bundle branch block pattern with few exceptions. During biventricular stimulation associated with right ventricular (RV) apical pacing, the QRS is often positive in lead V1. The frontal plane QRS axis is usually in the right superior quadrant and occasionally in the left superior quadrant. Barring incorrect placement of lead V1 (too high on the chest), lack of LV capture, LV lead displacement or marked latency (exit block or delay from the stimulation site), ventricular fusion with the spontaneous QRS complex, a negative QRS complex in lead V1 during biventricular pacing involving the RV apex probably reflects different activation of an heterogeneous biventricular substrate (ischemia, scar, His-Purkinje participation in view of the varying patterns of LV activation in spontaneous left bundle branch block) and does not necessarily indicate a poor (electrical or mechanical) contribution from LV stimulation. In this situation, it is imperative to rule out the presence of coronary venous pacing via the middle cardiac vein or even unintended placement of two leads in the RV. During biventricular pacing with the RV lead in the outflow tract, the paced QRS in lead V1 is often negative and the frontal plane paced QRS axis is often directed to the right inferior quadrant (right axis deviation). In patients with sinus rhythm and a relatively short PR interval, ventricular fusion with competing native conduction during biventricular pacing may cause misinterpretation of the ECG because narrowing of the paced QRS complex simulates appropriate biventricular capture. This represents a common pitfall in device follow-up. Elimination of ventricular fusion by shortening the AV delay, is often associated with clinical improvement. Anodal stimulation may complicate threshold testing and should not be misinterpreted as pacemaker malfunction. One must be cognizant of the various disturbances that can disrupt 1:1 atrial tracking and cause loss of ventricular resynchronization. (1) Upper rate response. The upper rate response of biventricular pacemakers differs from the traditional Wenckebach upper rate response of conventional antibradycardia pacemakers because heart failure patients generally do not have sinus bradycardia or AV junctional conduction delay. The programmed upper rate should be sufficiently fast to avoid loss of resynchronization in situations associated with sinus tachycardia. (2) Below the programmed upper rate. This may be caused by a variety of events (especially ventricular premature complexes and favored by the presence of first-degree AV block) that alter the timing of sensed and paced events. In such cases, atrial events become trapped into the postventricular atrial refractory period at atrial rates below the programmed upper rate in the presence of spontaneous AV conduction. Algorithms are available to restore resynchronization by automatic temporary abbreviation of the postventricular atrial refractory period.

[Peculiarities in the follow up of resynchronization therapy]

While resynchronization therapy (CRT) is based on conventional pacemaker- and ICD technology, its main intention is to minimize inter- and intraventricular asynergy and to establish optimal AV timing if sinus rhythm is preserved. The focus of this contribution is a series of conditions which jeopardize the therapeutic goal of CRT and should be recognized and hopefully corrected during follow up of CRT systems. These scenarios include uncertainties about left ventricular capture, double sensing in the ventricles, inhibition of the ventricular output (and loss of resynchronization), atrial and ventricular tachycardia and rate adaptation. Technical issues of following rhythm management devices are only discussed in the context of CRT requirements.

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

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

Biventricular pacing: it isn't always as it seems

Cardiac desynchronization therapy has established benefits in the management of symptomatic heart failure patients, although left ventricular lead placement remains challenging. We present a case report involving apparent biventricular pacing via the great cardiac vein, which through an appreciation of the surface ECG, revealed dual site right ventricular pacing.

Entrainment of ventricular tachycardia with a permanent biventricular pacemaker

Biventricular pacing has been introduced as a treatment for congestive heart failure. These devices presently pace and sense from two disparate ventricular sites. Antitachycardia pacing (ATP) is used for termination of sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) and has been incorporated with simultaneous dual site ventricular pacing for treatment of VT. We report a case of entrainment of sustained monomorphic VT in a 62-year-old female with an ischemic cardiomyopathy and VT, who received a biventricular pacemaker-implantable cardioverter defibrillator, Contak CD (Guidant, St. Paul, MN). Biventricular pacing sites were at the right ventricular apex and the middle of the anterior cardiac vein on the left ventricle. The entrained VT has a left bundle branch block and left axis deviation morphology with a cycle length of 350 msec. ATP at 270 msec produced concealed entrainment of an induced VT. Only one pacing site demonstrated capture. The inability to capture both pacing sites simultaneously was the result of ventricular refractoriness at one of the sites during ATP of the VT. The entrance and exit points of the loop for VT appeared to rest between the two pacing sites in the intraventricular septum. This case illustrates one of the sensing limitations of today's biventricular pacing defibrillator systems.