Pacing Vector Research Articles

Management of Phrenic Stimulation in CRT Patients over the Long Term: Still an Unmet Need ?

Phrenic stimulation (PS) may cause intolerable symptoms and prevent CRT delivery in 2-5% of patients. We sought to ensure effective cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) delivery by management of PS at the left ventricular (LV) target site. Two hundred and eleven consecutive patients received a CRT device despite PS occurrence at the LV target site at implantation, when a PS-LV difference >2V was achieved by LV stimulation programming (cathode, pacing vector). PS management strategy both at implantation and at follow-up (FU) aimed to keep the target LV implantation site. LV reverse remodeling was assessed by echocardiography before implantation and at follow-up. LV lead placement was lateral/posterolateral in all the 211 patients; 51 of 211 had detectable PS at FU, 26 of 211 (12.3%) were symptomatic. Symptoms occurred more frequently when PS-LV difference was <3V (16/16 vs 10/35, P < 0.001). Cathode and pacing vector reprogramming improved the PS-LV difference and symptoms in 14 of 23 patients. LV output as threshold +0.5V was helpful to manage PS symptoms in patients with a PS-LV ≤2V at FU. Median FU was 34.9 (16-50) months: 12 patients had tolerable PS symptoms, 76% (39/51) were objective responders at echocardiography compared to 74% (119/160) in patients without PS (P = NS). CRT delivery at long term is feasible despite PS at the target LV site. PS management is mandatory in about 12.3% of patients at FU, with 6.6% remaining symptomatic. Symptoms improve at FU when a PS-LV >3V is achieved. Further improvement in lead manufacturing and pacing electronics are awaited to meet this clinical need.

Use of a quadripolar left ventricular lead to achieve successful implantation in patients with previous failed attempts at cardiac resynchronization therapy

AimsProblems with implanting a left ventricular (LV) lead during cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) procedures are not uncommon and may occur for a variety of reasons including phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) and high capture thresholds. We aimed to perform successful CRT in patients with previous LV lead problems using the multiple pacing configurations available with the St Jude Quartet model 1458Q quadripolar LV lead to overcome PNS or high capture thresholds.Methods and resultsFour patients with previous failed attempts at LV lead implantation underwent a further attempt at CRT using a Quartet lead. In all four cases, successful CRT was achieved using a Quartet lead placed in a branch of the coronary sinus. Problems with PNS or high capture thresholds were seen in all four patients but were successfully overcome. Satisfactory lead parameters were seen at implant, pre-discharge, and at short-term follow-up (8.5 ± 5 weeks).ConclusionThe Quartet lead allows 10 different pacing vectors to be used and may overcome common pacing problems because of the multiple pacing configurations available. Problems with either PNS or unsatisfactory pacing parameters experienced during CRT may be resolved simply by changing the pacing configuration using this quadripolar lead system.

The effect of electronic repositioning on left ventricular pacing and phrenic nerve stimulation

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves survival and reduces heart failure symptoms. However, phrenic nerve stimulation and high pacing thresholds are common problems that limit CRT effectiveness. Current technology allows reprogramming of left ventricular (LV) pacing vectors, permitting 'electronic repositioning' to overcome both phrenic nerve stimulation and high pacing output without the need for re-operation. Patients underwent prospective evaluation of a CRT system implantation with a bipolar LV. Optimal LV threshold and avoidance of phrenic nerve stimulation were determined at baseline and at 6 months. A subset of 48 patients underwent more detailed evaluation of pacing threshold and phrenic nerve stimulation at baseline and at 6 months. Between 2004 and 2007, 228 patients underwent CRT implantation (64 CRT pacemakers, 164 CRT defibrillators). At baseline, electronic reprogramming to determine an alternate configuration compared with standard LVtip to LVring found a ≥ 1.0 V reduction in pacing threshold in 80 patients (35%). Of the 17 patients who had an LVtip to LVring configuration and high pacing threshold (>5.0 V), 16 could be reduced by >1.0 V (94%) and 11 could be reduced by >2.0 V through electronic repositioning alone without repositioning the lead (65%). At implant, there were 48 patients with phrenic nerve stimulation at less than maximum pacing output (21%) using the standard LVtip to LVring configuration. In 37 cases (77%), there was at least one other configuration with no phrenic nerve stimulation, which prevented the need for lead revision. Electronic repositioning is an important tool in the management of CRT patients which may help to lower thresholds, avoid phrenic nerve stimulation, and prevent unnecessary re-operations for LV lead repositioning.

Initial Single-Center Experience of a Quadripolar Pacing Lead for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

The Quartet model 1458Q (St. Jude Medical, Sylmar, CA, USA) lead is a quadripolar left ventricular (LV) lead with pace/sense capability from four electrodes (tip and three rings). The lead is capable of pacing in 10 different configurations rather than the three that are available in conventional bipolar pacing leads. We describe a single-center initial experience of the use of this lead in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Twenty-eight patients for a CRT with cardiac defibrillator were implanted between October 2009 and May 2010 with a Quartet lead . Lead position, pacing parameters, stability, complications, and presence of phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) data were collected at implant and predischarge. Follow-up data were collected at 15 ± 8 weeks for all patients. A Quartet lead was successfully implanted in 96% (27/28) of patients (age 61 ± 15 years; 82% male; ischemic etiology 50%; mean left ventricular [LV] ejection fraction 25 ± 7%; left bundle branch block 68%). PNS was seen at implant in 11 patients (41%) with at least one vector. In eight of these cases (72%), the need for lead repositioning was averted by programming LV pacing utilizing the additional vectors available with the Quartet lead. These initial data suggest that pacing with the Quartet lead is associated with a high implant success rate and stable pacing parameters acutely and at short-term follow-up. The 10 LV pacing vectors available with this lead may allow PNS and capture threshold problems to be easily overcome.

Quadripolar Left Ventricular Lead in a Patient with CRT-D does Not Overcome Phrenic Nerve Stimulation

Effective cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) requires an accurate atrio-biventricular pacing system. The innovative Quartet lead is a quadripolar, over-the-wire left ventricular lead with four electrodes and has recently been designed to provide more options and greater control in pacing vector selection. A lead with multiple pacing electrodes is a potential alternative to physical adjustment of the lead and may help to overcome high thresholds and phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS).

Coronary sinus fistula: A reason not to implant a transvenous left ventricular lead

A 40-year-old woman referred for biventricular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation with an ejection fraction of 30%, New York Heart Association class III symptoms, and left bundle branch block QRS duration of 160 ms (patient had nonischemic cardiomyopathy and no evidence of occlusive coronary artery disease by nuclear perfusion imaging). Occlusive venography (Figure 1) demonstrated a coronary artery‐to‐coronary venous fistula. The left anterior descending artery is seen anteriorly (along the interventricular septal region) in the right anterior oblique image. There is no evidence of coronary sinus dilation, and the proximal coronary sinus was a relatively narrow vessel with no significant lateral branches. A shunt assessment demonstrated no significant left-to-right shunt. Based on the findings, the decision was made not to place a coronary sinus lead due to risk of thrombus formation and embolization to the coronary arteries. Additionally, there was a lack of suitable lateral branches to provide an optimal pacing vector. A decision to consider a surgically implanted lead was made. A follow-up coronary computed tomography (CT) scan interestingly did not document a fistula, likely because the image resolution of the 64-slice CT was not sufficient to visualize a small fistula.

Phrenic Stimulation

Background— Phrenic stimulation (PS) may hinder left ventricular (LV) pacing. We prospectively observed its prevalence in consecutive patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. Methods and Results— In the years 2003 to 2006, 197 patients received a CRT device. PS and LV threshold measurements were carried out at implantation and at 6-month follow-up. LV reverse remodeling was assessed by echocardiography before implantation and at follow-up. LV lead placement was lateral/posterolateral in 86% of patients. Both PS and LV reverse remodeling occurred most frequently at the lateral/posterolateral LV pacing sites ( P &lt;0.001). PS was detected in 73 (37%) of patients and was clinically relevant in 41 (22%). The detection of PS at implantation had a poor sensitivity, as it occurred only in left lateral or sitting position in 27 patients. Ten patients (5%) underwent repeated surgery and 4 (2%) had their CRT turned off because of PS. At follow-up, we could manage PS noninvasively in 32 patients with a small PS-LV threshold difference: in 20 by cathode programmability (3 also thanks to automatic management of LV output) and in 12 (without cathode programmability) by programming the LV output as threshold +1 V. Conclusions— PS may seriously hinder CRT. A bipolar LV lead and cathode programmability are mandatory to avoid PS by changing the LV pacing vector at target sites for CRT. LV stability at target sites despite PS should also be pursued by these means. The automatic adjustment of LV pacing output is complementary in patients with a small PS-LV threshold difference.

Clinical Evaluation of Two Different Evoked Response Sensing Methods for Automatic Capture Detection in the Left Ventricle

This acute feasibility study compared two different automatic capture detection methodologies, the reduced coupling capacitor (RCC) and the independent pace/sense (IPS) methods, for the left ventricle (LV). LV threshold tests were performed in DDD mode, with LV-only and bi-ventricular (BiV) pacing using an external cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) defibrillator. Evoked response (ER) signals from LV leads were recorded using the LV(Tip) (LV(Tip)-->Can) and LV(Ring) (LV(Ring)-->Can) to empty pulse generator (Can) housing sensing vectors to evaluate the two methodologies. Pacing vector, pulse duration, atrioventricular delay, and interventricular delay were varied to assess their effects on ER. The minimum ER amplitude (ER(min)), signal-to-artifact ratio (SAR), and ER amplitude voltage dependence were evaluated. ER(min)>2 mV and SAR(min)>2 define potential automatic LV capture detection for the two methodologies. Data collected from 43 patients (63.7 +/- 11.0 years) were analyzed, including unipolar and bipolar (14/29) LV leads. Neither ER sensing method was affected by changing the pacing vector. The LV(Tip)-->Can ER(min) was significantly decreased at the 1.0-ms pulse duration when compared to 0.4-ms (p < 0.05). During BiV pacing, LV(Tip)-->Can ER(min) increased at negative interventricular delays and decreased at positive interventricular delays relative to simultaneous pacing. LV(Tip)-->Can resulted in fewer patients with sufficient ER characteristics for capture detection, albeit only significantly at the extended pulse duration (79% vs 97%, p < 0.05) and at simultaneous and positive interventricular delays (81% vs 97%, p < 0.05). Though LV capture detection was feasible using both investigated methods, the RCC method (LV(Tip)-->Can) sensitivity to the evaluated pacing parameters suggests the IPS method (LV(Ring)-->Can) provides a more robust performance.

Acute performance evaluation of a new ventricular automatic capture algorithm

This study evaluated the acute clinical performance of a new ventricular automatic capture algorithm developed to work with all lead types and pacing vectors. During regular pacemaker implant or replacement, AutoThreshold and manual threshold tests were performed in ventricular unipolar (UP) and bipolar (BP, if applicable) pacing using a customized external prototype INSIGNIA pacemaker. The success rate and accuracy of two different modes (commanded and ambulatory) of the automatic capture algorithm were used to evaluate the performance. Loss-of-capture events (two consecutive non-captured beats without backup pacing) were used to assess safety. Data of 53 patients (33 DDD/20 VVI) from four medical centres were analysed. Tested leads included 43 BP and 10 UP from nine manufacturers, and seven had electrodes with low polarization. The rate of successful commanded and ambulatory AutoThreshold tests was 96 and 94%, respectively, with an average absolute threshold difference compared with manual threshold of < 0.1 V at 0.4 ms (commanded 0.07 +/- 0.07 V and ambulatory 0.08 +/- 0.07 V). There was no significant difference in performance between UP/BP pacing, polarization, and lead type. No loss-of-capture event was observed. When successful, the ventricular automatic capture algorithm accurately determined pacing thresholds in either a UP or BP pacing configuration among all leads tested.

Localization of breakthrough site of canine monomorphic ventricular tachycardia by pacemapping. A vectorial approach.

The precision and limitations of ventricular pacemapping as a method to localize the site of earliest breakthrough of ventricular tachycardia (VT) were investigated in a canine model of experimental myocardial infarction. Forty-one episodes of VT induced in 10 animals were mapped using a standard grid of 64 endocardial and epicardial bipolar electrodes to determine the site of earliest endocardial or epicardial breakthrough of activation during VT. Each of these 64 recording sites was also used for ventricular pacing during sinus rhythm at cycle lengths comparable to those of the VTs. Orthogonal X, Y, and Z Frank electrocardiographic (ECG) leads were recorded during all episodes of VT and ventricular pacing from all sites after the chest was closed in all animals. Surface ECG waveforms corresponding to each VT and each ventricular pacing were compared pairwise by measuring the Euclidean metric difference between the VT and ventricular pacing vectors with the orthogonal ECG leads as their X, Y, and Z components. The pacing site that generated the vector most similar to VT vector (smallest vectorial difference) was defined as the predicted breakthrough site. This predicted site of breakthrough was identical to the actual site of breakthrough determined by activation sequence mapping during VT for only nine VTs (22%). However, for an additional 27 VTs (66%), the observed and predicted breakthrough locations were at adjacent (1 cm or less apart) recording sites. For five VTs (12%), the two sites were remote, the distance between them exceeding 1 cm. In this model, locating the breakthrough site by pacemapping is exact in only a small minority of VTs. However, when orthogonal surface ECG leads are used for comparison, pacemapping can predict the site of earliest breakthrough during VT with a 1-cm resolution in the majority of VTs.