Key result
Apical leadless pacemaker sites carry ~74% collision risk, while left anterior fascicular LBBAP minimizes risk.
Why the study?
The mechanical impact of leadless pacemakers on intracardiac structures and the optimal site for leadless left bundle branch area pacing remain unclear.
Does the site and device size of leadless LBBAP affect intracardiac collision risk in heart failure patients?
Does the site and device size of leadless LBBAP affect intracardiac collision risk in heart failure patients?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Computational modeling demonstrates that leadless LBBAP via the left anterior fascicle minimizes intracardiac collision risks, highlighting the importance of patient-specific device selection and septal targeting.
Background: Conduction system pacing with leadless left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a promising application of leadless pacemakers (L-PMs). However, the mechanical impact of the L-PM on intracardiac structures may worsen tricuspid regurgitation and induce ventricular arrhythmia. The optimal site of leadless conduction system pacing also remains unclear. Objective: This study aimed to quantify device- and site-specific collision risks and identify the optimal site for leadless LBBAP using computational modeling. Methods: We conducted a modeling study assessing collision risks of contemporary (Micra TPS, Aveir AR, and Aveir VR) and future L-PM devices and exploring the optimal site for leadless LBBAP using cardiac computed tomography models from 10 patients with heart failure. Virtual L-PM implantation on the right ventricular (RV) septal wall was performed, and models of the RV free wall, papillary muscles, moderator band, and tricuspid valve structures enabled assessment of device-structure interactions. Computer simulations examined collision risk across devices of varying dimensions throughout the cardiac cycle. Results: Collision risk increased with device length and volume, primarily driven by RV wall interactions. Apical pacing sites carried a 73.6%-75.2% collision risk, and overall wall collisions increased by 3%-8% per 5 mm device length. Tricuspid valve and papillary muscle collisions depended on implant region, with the highest risks of collision in basal-inferoseptal (>70%) and mid-inferoseptal regions (>40%), respectively. Leadless LBBAP via the left anterior fascicle had the lowest collision rates. Conclusion: These findings support patient-specific device selection and careful septal targeting of leadless LBBAP to minimize complications, optimize physiological activation, and guide future L-PM designs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2026) studied Heart failure (n=10). Virtual leadless left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) vs. Alternative pacing sites and device dimensions was evaluated on Collision risk across devices of varying dimensions throughout the cardiac cycle. Virtual leadless pacemaker implantation simulations showed apical pacing sites carried a 73.6%-75.2% collision risk, while leadless LBBAP via the left anterior fascicle had the lowest rates.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: