Risk factors of pacing‐induced cardiomyopathy—Insights from lead position

Figures

• 

  FIGURE 1. Representative cases. (A) ECG and chest radiograph of a patient with leads implanted in RVA. (B) ECG and CT data of the axial and short‐axis views of the RV of a patient with leads implanted in mid‐RVS. LA, left atrium; LV, left ventricular RA, right atrium; RV, right ventricular; IVS, intraventricular septum

• 

  FIGURE 2. Flow chart of the study selection. CT, computed tomography; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; PM, permanent pacemaker; RVA, right ventricular apex; RVS, right ventricular septum; RVAP, right ventricular apex pacing; RVSP, right ventricular septum pacing

• 

  FIGURE 3. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis of pacing‐induced cardiomyopathy. (A) Mid‐RVSP was not associated with the incidence of PICM compared to RVAP. (B) A pre‐LVESD of ≧33 mm was associated with the incidence of PICM as compared to a pre‐LVESD of <33 mm. (C) A paced QRS duration of >150 ms was associated with the incidence of PICM as compared to a paced QRS duration of ≦150 ms. pre‐LVESD, preoperative left ventricular end‐systolic diameter; PICM, pacing‐induced cardiomyopathy; RVAP, right ventricular apex pacing; RVSP, right ventricular septum pacing

• 

  FIGURE 4. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis of pacing‐induced cardiomyopathy. Stratification by lead position and paced QRS duration of >150 ms. PICM, pacing‐induced cardiomyopathy; pre‐LVESD, preoperative left ventricular end‐systolic diameter; RVA, right ventricular apex; pre‐LVESD, preoperative left ventricular end‐systolic diameter