Humans ; Atrial Fibrillation/surgery* ; Heart ; Heart Failure/therapy* ; Heart Conduction System

Objective: Explore the relationship between tip of the left bundle branch pacing lead and anatomic location of left bundle branch as well as the mechanism of left bundle branch current of injury. To clarify the clinical value of left bundle branch current of injury during operation. Methods: The pacing leads were implanted in the hearts of two living swines. Intraoperative electrophysiological study confirmed that the left bundle branch or only the deep left ventricular septum was captured at low output. Immediately after operation, the gross specimen of swine hearts was stained with iodine to observe the gross distribution of His-purkinje conduction system on the left ventricular endocardium and its relationship with the leads. Subsequently, the swine hearts were fixed with formalin solution, and the pacing leads were removed after the positions were marked. The swine hearts were then sectioned and stained with Masson and Goldner trichrome, and the relationship between the anatomic location of the conduction system and the tip of the lead was observed under a light microscope. Results: After iodine staining of the specimen, the His-purkinje conduction system was observed with the naked eye in a net-like distribution, and the lead tip was screwed deeply and fixed in the left bundle branch area of the left ventricular subendocardium in the ventricular septum. Masson and Goldner trichrome staining showed that left bundle branch pacing lead directly passed through the left bundle branch when there was left bundle branch potential with left bundle branch current of injury, while it was not directly contact the left bundle branch when there was left bundle branch potential without left bundle branch current of injury. Conclusion: The left bundle branch current of injury observed on intracardiac electrocardiogram during His-purkinje conduction system pacing suggests that the pacing lead directly contacted the conduction bundle or its branches, therefore, the captured threshold was relatively low. Left bundle branch current of injury can be used as an important anatomic and electrophysiological evidence of left bundle branch capture.
Animals ; Swine ; Bundle of His/physiology* ; Ventricular Septum ; Cardiac Pacing, Artificial ; Heart Conduction System ; Electrocardiography ; Iodine

Humans ; Atrial Fibrillation/surgery* ; Heart ; Heart Failure/therapy* ; Heart Conduction System

Objective: Explore the relationship between tip of the left bundle branch pacing lead and anatomic location of left bundle branch as well as the mechanism of left bundle branch current of injury. To clarify the clinical value of left bundle branch current of injury during operation. Methods: The pacing leads were implanted in the hearts of two living swines. Intraoperative electrophysiological study confirmed that the left bundle branch or only the deep left ventricular septum was captured at low output. Immediately after operation, the gross specimen of swine hearts was stained with iodine to observe the gross distribution of His-purkinje conduction system on the left ventricular endocardium and its relationship with the leads. Subsequently, the swine hearts were fixed with formalin solution, and the pacing leads were removed after the positions were marked. The swine hearts were then sectioned and stained with Masson and Goldner trichrome, and the relationship between the anatomic location of the conduction system and the tip of the lead was observed under a light microscope. Results: After iodine staining of the specimen, the His-purkinje conduction system was observed with the naked eye in a net-like distribution, and the lead tip was screwed deeply and fixed in the left bundle branch area of the left ventricular subendocardium in the ventricular septum. Masson and Goldner trichrome staining showed that left bundle branch pacing lead directly passed through the left bundle branch when there was left bundle branch potential with left bundle branch current of injury, while it was not directly contact the left bundle branch when there was left bundle branch potential without left bundle branch current of injury. Conclusion: The left bundle branch current of injury observed on intracardiac electrocardiogram during His-purkinje conduction system pacing suggests that the pacing lead directly contacted the conduction bundle or its branches, therefore, the captured threshold was relatively low. Left bundle branch current of injury can be used as an important anatomic and electrophysiological evidence of left bundle branch capture.
Animals ; Swine ; Bundle of His/physiology* ; Ventricular Septum ; Cardiac Pacing, Artificial ; Heart Conduction System ; Electrocardiography ; Iodine

INTRODUCTION: Despite the challenges related to His bundle pacing (HBP), recent data suggest an improved success rate with experience. As a non-university, non-electrophysiology specialised centre in Singapore, we report our experiences in HBP using pacing system analyser alone. METHODS: Data of 28 consecutive patients who underwent HBP from August 2018 to February 2019 was retrospectively obtained. The clinical and technical outcomes of these patients were compared between two timeframes of three months each. Patients were followed up for 12 months. RESULTS: Immediate technical success was achieved in 21 (75.0%) patients (mean age 73.3 ± 10.7 years, 47.6% female). The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 53.9% ± 12.1%. The indications for HBP were atrioventricular block (n = 13, 61.9%), sinus node dysfunction (n = 7, 33.3%) and upgrade from implantable cardioverter-defibrillator to His-cardiac resynchronisation therapy (n = 1, 4.8%). No significant difference was observed in baseline characteristics between Timeframe 1 and Timeframe 2. Improvements pertaining to mean fluoroscopy time were achieved between the two timeframes. There was one HBP-related complication of lead displacement during Timeframe 1. All patients with successful HBP achieved non-selective His bundle (NSHB) capture, whereas only eight patients had selective His bundle (SHB) capture. NSHB and SHB capture thresholds remained stable at the 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSION Permanent HBP is feasible and safe, even without the use of an electrophysiology recording system. This was successfully achieved in 75% of patients, with no adverse clinical outcomes during the follow-up period.
Humans ; Female ; Middle Aged ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Male ; Bundle of His ; Follow-Up Studies ; Stroke Volume ; Retrospective Studies ; Treatment Outcome ; Cardiac Pacing, Artificial/adverse effects* ; Electrocardiography ; Ventricular Function, Left/physiology*

Atrial Fibrillation/surgery* ; Atrioventricular Node/surgery* ; Catheter Ablation ; Heart Failure/therapy* ; Humans

Objective: To explore the feasibility, safety and effectiveness of left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) in children aged ≤3 years. Methods: A total of 10 children aged ≤3 years who were diagnosed with brady arrhythmia in the First Hospital of Tsinghua University from September 2020 to September 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. All the children met the indication of permanent pacemaker implantation and underwent LBBAP successfully. The intraoperative data (pacing parameters, electrocardiogram and radiographic imaging), cardiac ultrasound data and clinical data during regular postoperative follow-up were recorded. The preoperative and postoperative data were compared using matched samples t test. Results: Ten children (aged (1.6±0.7) years with weight of (10.3±2.5) kg) underwent LBBAP successfully. The QRS wave duration on the postoperative electrocardiogram was (100±9) ms, and the percentage of ventricular pacing was (97±7)%. The postoperative follow-up period was 6 (6, 12) months. At 1 week after operation, the left ventricular end-diastolic diameter Z scores in these children reduced significantly compared with those before operation (1.3±0.6 vs. 3.6±1.1, t=9.37, P<0.001). During the follow-up period, cardiac function was normal and the last left ventricular ejection fraction was (66±4)% in all children. At the last follow-up, the pacing threshold of the 10 children was smaller than 1.0 V and was acceptable. Compared with the intraoperative baseline values, the pacing threshold was slightly higher ((0.8±0.1) vs. (0.5±0.1) V, t=-5.27, P=0.001). However, no significant difference was found regarding sensing threshold ((16±5) vs. (14±4) mV, t=-0.83, P=0.426) and impedance ((584±88) vs. (652±86) Ω, t=2.26, P=0.050). During follow-up, no electrode related complications were recorded. Conclusions: LBBAP is safe and effective for infants and toddlers. Narrow QRS pacing with stable pacing parameters and normal cardiac function could be achieved postoperatively.
Bundle of His ; Bundle-Branch Block ; Cardiac Pacing, Artificial/methods* ; Child, Preschool ; Electrocardiography/methods* ; Humans ; Retrospective Studies ; Stroke Volume ; Treatment Outcome ; Ventricular Function, Left

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of left bundle branch pacing(LBBP) in patients after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods: This is a retrospective study. A total of 35 patients underwent TAVI and received pacemaker implantation from January 2018 to December 2020 in Beijing Fuwai Hospital were enrolled. Patients were divided into LBBP group (n=12) and right ventricular apex pacing (RVAP) group (n=23) according to the pacing position. The success rate of operation in LBBP group was calculated, and the occurrence of complications were observed, and the parameters of pacemaker were measured on the 3rd day and 1, 3 and 6 months after operation. The N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), echocardiographic and ECG indexes were compared between the two groups on the 3rd day and 1, 3, and 6 months after pacemaker implantation. Result: A total of 35 patients were included, The age was (76.4±7.7) years, including 19 males (54.3%). The procedure time ((86.58±17.10)min vs. (68.74±9.18)min, P<0.001) and fluoroscopy duration ((20.08±4.44)min vs. (17.00±2.26)min, P<0.001) were significantly longer in LBBP group compared with RVAP group. The operation success rate of LBBP group was 11/12. There was no serious operation related complications such as pneumothorax, hemothorax, electrode dislocation, infection, and lower limb bleeding. The patients were followed up for 7.43 (5.21, 9.84) months. The programmed parameters of pacemaker were in the ideal range and stable during follow-up. At 3 and 6 months after operation, the left ventricular ejection fraction in LBBP group was higher than that in RVAP Group (at 3 months: (60.75±2.89)% vs. (57.35±3.33)%, P=0.004; at 6 months: (63.17±3.33)% vs. (56.17±3.97)%, P<0.001), NT-proBNP values was lower in LBBP group than that in RVAP Group (at 3 months: 822 (607, 1 150)ng/L vs. 1 052 (902, 1 536)ng/L, P=0.006; at 6 months: 440 (330,679)ng/L vs. 783 (588, 1 023)ng/L, P=0.001). At 1, 3 and 6 months after operation, the QRS duration was shorter in LBBP group than that in RVAP group (1 month: 99 (97, 107)ms vs. 126(124, 130)ms, P<0.001; 3 months: 98(96, 105)ms vs. 129(128, 133)ms, P<0.001; 6 months: 96(94, 104)ms vs. 130(128, 132)ms, P<0.001). Conclusions: For patients with permanent pacemaker indications after TAVI, LBBP is feasible, safe and reliable. It could improve the cardiac function in the short term, the long-term effect of LBBP needs to be further observed.
Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Bundle of His ; Cardiac Pacing, Artificial/methods* ; Electrocardiography/methods* ; Fluoroscopy ; Humans ; Male ; Retrospective Studies ; Stroke Volume ; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects* ; Treatment Outcome ; Ventricular Function, Left

Bundle of His ; Bundle-Branch Block ; Cardiac Pacing, Artificial ; Electrocardiography ; Humans ; Purkinje Fibers

Cardiac Pacing, Artificial ; Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy ; Electrocardiography ; Heart Conduction System