Electrophysiological characteristics of lead position-dependent electrogram uninterrupted transition during left bundle branch pacing.

The interrupted technique of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) limits the continuous monitoring of paced electrocardiogram and intracardiac electrogram (EGM) transitions, which may result in overlooked or misinterpreted subtle transitions. This study aimed to explore the electrophysiological characteristics of lead position-dependent EGM continuous transitions to evaluate lead depth and to investigate the clinical significance of transseptal pacing modalities. A continuous pacing and recording technique enabled by a rotatable connector was used to allow the real-time monitoring of progressive changes in paced EGM and electrocardiographic morphology. Careful observations were conducted to evaluate whether there were significant changes in the amplitude and morphology of the ventricular current of injury (COI), R-wave peak times in leads V1 and V6, QRS duration, and impedance at different interventricular septal depths. The study included 105 patients. Nonselective LBBP was achieved in 94 patients (89.5%), of whom 88 (83.8%) achieved selective LBBP (SLBBP). Left ventricular septal pacing was confirmed in 11 patients (11.5%). The amplitude of ventricular EGM predictably changed with radial septum depth and peaked in the interventricular septum (26.3±11.3 mV). As the lead was inserted into the left ventricular subendocardium, the ventricular COI declined to a level approximating that of the right septum (11.7 ± 6.3 mV for SLBBP vs 10.4 ± 5.8 mV for right ventricular septal pacing). When selective left bundle branch capture occurred, significant morphological transitions in the ventricular COI were observed in the unfiltered EGM. The continuous recording technique provides a more detailed understanding of pacing lead radial depth throughout implantation. COI amplitude and morphology variations can identify different pacing modalities, particularly in recognizing SLBBP.

Shen J ，Jiang L ，Wu H ，Zhang L ，Li H ，Pan L ... -  《-》

The characteristics of the electrocardiogram and the intracardiac electrogram in left bundle branch pacing.

Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) has recently been reported to maintain left ventricular electrical synchrony with a low and stable threshold. However, the electrocardiogram (ECG) definitions of LBBP have not been well established. We report four cases to show the characteristics of the ECG and the intracardiac electrogram (EGM) in LBBP. Four patients, two with an atrioventricular block (AVB) and two with left bundle branch block (LBBB), were included in the study. LBBP was performed and the ECGs and EGMs were collected and compared at different pacing outputs. Selective LBBP (S-LBBP) was defined as only capturing the LBB with a typical RBBB morphology and a discrete component between the pacing stimulus and ventricular activation in the EGMs. While nonselective LBBP (NS-LBBP) captured both the LBB and the local myocardium, resulting in a narrow right bundle branch block (RBBB) morphology without the discrete component. The left bundle branch (LBB) potential was recorded in two cases during narrow QRS complex or LBBB correction by selective His bundle pacing and SLBBP (n = 3) was achieved. A constant and shortest stimulus to left ventricular activation time (LVAT) in LBBP was obtained at different pacing outputs. The ECG and EGM characteristics of LBBP can be summarized as: 1) RBBB pattern; 2) usually with the LBB potential; 3) SLBBP with specific ECG changes and a discrete component in EGM; and 4) with a constant and shortest stimulus to LVAT at different pacing outputs. Further studies are necessary to confirm these observations.

Chen X ，Wu S ，Su L ，Su Y ，Huang W ... -  《-》

A Continuous Pacing and Recording Technique for Differentiating Left Bundle Branch Pacing From Left Ventricular Septal Pacing: Electrophysiologic Evidence From an Intrapatient-Controlled Study.

Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a promising approach for achieving near-physiologic pacing. However, differentiating LBBP from left ventricular septal endocardial pacing (LVS(e)P) remains a challenge. This study aimed to establish a simple and effective method for differentiating LBBP from LVS(e)P and to evaluate their electrophysiologic characteristics. LBBP, using continuous uninterrupted pacing and real-time monitoring of electrocardiograms along with intracardiac electrograms, was performed in 97 consecutive patients. We evaluated the electrophysiologic characteristics observed during LBBP using 6 modalities: right ventricular septal pacing (RVSP), intraventricular septal pacing (IVSP 1 and 2), LVS(e)P, nonselective LBBP (NSLBBP), and selective LBBP (SLBBP). Of the 97 patients, 87 (89.7%) met the criteria (abrupt change in paced QRS morphology with a transition from Qr to QR/qR in lead V1 and shortening of stimulus to V6 R-wave peak time [Stim-V6RWPT] of ≥ 10 ms with constant output while rather than after lead screwing) for nonselective left bundle branch (LBB) capture. Selective LBB capture was observed in 82 patients (84.5%). The Stim-V6RWPT of NSLBBP and SLBBP were significantly shorter than LVS(e)P (respectively, 67.1 ± 8.7 ms, 67.0 ± 9.3 ms, and 82.1 ± 10.9 ms). Stim-QRSend was the narrowest in IVSP2 (136.6 ± 15.2 ms) instead of NSLBBP (140.0 ± 17.1 ms). The uninterrupted pacing technique for differentiating LBBP from LVS(e)P in the same group of patients is feasible. Electrophysiologic evidence from our intrapatient-controlled study shows that LBBP and LVS(e)P differ in ventricular electrical synchronization.

Shen J ，Jiang L ，Wu H ，Cai X ，Zhuo S ，Pan L ... -  《-》

Transseptal Transition Patterns During Left Bundle Branch Area Lead Implantation.

Continuous deep septal pacing and signal recording during implantation of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) lead enables to monitor beat-to-beat changes of electrocardiogram (ECG) and myocardial current of injury (COI) as the lead crosses the septum. This study aimed to characterize patterns of continuous QRS, ST-T, and COI change for monitoring of the lead depth and instantaneous determination of the obtained capture type (LBBP vs left ventricular septal pacing [LVSP]). The ECG and COI during lead implantation were scrutinized for sudden changes of V6 R-wave peak time, V1 initial and terminal R-wave amplitude, V3-V6 R-wave amplitude, repolarization pattern and S-wave amplitude in I, V5-V6, and COI drop. The sudden and gradual transition patterns were diagnosed depending on the presence or absence of the above beat-to-beat ECG phenomena, respectively. A total of 212 pacemaker recipients were analyzed; LBBP and LVSP were obtained in 77.4% and 22.6%, respectively. There were 4.7 ± 2.1 and 0.2 ± 0.6 beat-to-beat phenomena in LBBP and LVSP patients, respectively. The sudden transition pattern, recognized in 80.7%, had sensitivity and specificity for LBBP diagnosis of 98.8% and 81.2%, respectively. A sudden drop of COI (29.4 ± 8.5 mV to 12.8 ± 4.9 mV) was observed in 53.9% patients (LBBP was simultaneously obtained in 92.7%). Capture of left bundle branch during lead penetration is a beat-to-beat phenomenon. Two transseptal transition patterns were identified: 1) sudden, which is typical for obtaining LBBP; and 2) gradual, which is typical for obtaining LVSP. A sudden COI drop, a very observable phenomenon, also identified reaching the left subendocardial area.

Jastrzębski M ，Kiełbasa G ，Moskal P ，Bednarek A ，Rajzer M ，Burri H ，Curila K ，Vijayaraman P ... -  《-》

Characteristics of intracardiac electrogram of the interventricular septum in the left bundle branch pacing.

Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) has become a hot topic in the field of physiological pacing. However, only a few studies have described the characteristics of the intrinsic intracardiac electrogram (EGM) while placing the left bundle branch (LBB) lead. Herein, we reported a case with atrial premature contractions to the ventricle during the LBBP procedure. Paced and intrinsic (supraventricular) EGMs were recorded and analyzed. The myocardium of the interventricular septum could be divided into four regions based on electrophysiology: the right septal area, the left septal area, the endocardium of the left ventricular septum, and the LBB area. This might guide the electrophysiological localization of the LBB lead in the septum.

Cai X ，Jiang L ，Zhuo S ，Wu H ... -  《-》