Why the study?
Do conventional ECG criteria and fluoroscopy accurately predict septal position in RVOT pacing when validated with CTA?
Do conventional ECG criteria and fluoroscopy accurately predict septal position in RVOT pacing when validated with CTA?
Conventional ECG and fluoroscopy are inadequate for predicting septal RVOT lead placement, but the lateral fluoroscopic view offers better reliability than the LAO view.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Conventional ECG/fluoroscopy should not guide septal RVOT lead placement; leaves open CTA validation in prospective studies.
This study, using validation with CTA, showed that conventional ECG criteria and fluoroscopy are inaccurate in differentiating septal from anterior RVOT pacing. The fluoroscopic lateral view, as corroborated by CTA, is more reliable than the LAO view in predicting septal lead placement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sharma et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: