Why the study?
Does LV apical epicardial pacing improve left ventricular synchrony and function compared to RV pacing in children with complete atrioventricular block?
Does LV apical epicardial pacing improve left ventricular synchrony and function compared to RV pacing in children with complete atrioventricular block?
In children requiring epicardial pacing, the LV apex preserves left ventricular synchrony and systolic function significantly better than right ventricular pacing sites.
LV apical epicardial pacing may preserve function better in pediatric AV block; hypothesis-generating and requires RCTs before practice change.
AIMS: To analyse left ventricular (LV) synchrony and function with respect to the epicardial pacing site in the young. METHODS AND RESULTS: Left ventricular function and synchrony (M-mode, speckle tracking) were evaluated during mid-term follow-up in 32 children with complete non-surgical (n = 15) or surgical (n = 17) atrioventricular block (structural heart disease in 21/32) paced from LV apex (n = 19), right ventricular (RV) apex (n = 7), and RV free wall (n = 6), respectively. Data are in the following order: LV apical, RV apical, and RV free wall pacing. Septal to posterior wall motion delay (SPWMD) = median 0, 69, and 136 ms (P < 0.001), septal to lateral mechanical delay = 54 +/- 29, 73 +/- 24, and 129 +/- 70 ms (P = 0.001), apical to basal mechanical delay = 96 +/- 37, 106 +/- 50, and 79 +/- 18 ms (P NS), and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) = 57 +/- 9, 49 +/- 12, and 33 +/- 10% (P < 0.001), respectively. Left ventricular ejection fraction correlated negatively with SPWMD (R(2) = 0.454, P < 0.001) and septal to lateral mechanical delay (R(2) = 0.320, P < 0.001) but not with apical to basal mechanical delay. Right ventricular free wall pacing (P = 0.014) and SPWMD (P = 0.044) were negative multivariable predictors of LVEF. CONCLUSION: Compared with other sites, LV apical pacing preserves septal to lateral LV synchrony and systolic function and may be the preferred epicardial pacing site in the young.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gebauer et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: