Key result
Implantation of the Micra leadless pacemaker in the high ventricular septum resulted in a significantly shorter corrected QT interval compared to low ventricular septum pacing (440 ms vs 520 ms, p < 0.05).
Why the study?
The safety and electrical characteristics of various implanting sites of the Micra pacemaker remained to be evaluated.
Does high ventricular septum implantation of a leadless pacemaker provide better electrical characteristics and physiological pacing compared to low ventricular septum implantation?
Cohort (n=15)
No
Does high ventricular septum implantation of a leadless pacemaker provide better electrical characteristics and physiological pacing compared to low ventricular septum implantation?
Absolute Event Rate: 440% vs 520%
p-value: p=<.05
Implanting a leadless pacemaker in the high ventricular septum is feasible, safe, and may offer a more physiological pacing profile with shorter repolarization times than low septal pacing.
High septal Micra pacing may shorten repolarization; leaves open whether it improves outcomes versus low septal sites in prospective trials.
OBJECTIVE: To study the safety and electrical characteristics of various implanting sites of the Micra pacemaker. METHOD: A total of 15 patients from Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, were included, who were implanted with Micra leadless pacemakers and allocated to either the high ventricular septum group (eight patients) or the low ventricular septum group (seven patients) based on their individual patient factors and clinical conditions. The baseline of the patients, the implanting area, the electrocardiogram change after implantation, the implantation data, the threshold, R wave, impedance, and the date of the 1-month follow-up were then analyzed. With all of the data, the characteristics of different implantation sites of the Micra pacemaker were determined. RESULTS: Overall, the thresholds were low at implantation and remained stable over the 1-, 3-, 6-month, 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year follow-ups. On comparing the two groups, there was no difference in QRS duration at pacing (140.00 [40.00] ms vs. 179.00 [50.00] ms), threshold at implantation (0.38 [0.22] mV vs. 0.63 [1.00] mV), R wave at implantation ([10.85 ± 4.71] V vs. [7.26 ± 2.98] V), or impedance at implantation ([906.25 ± 162.39] Ω vs. [750.00 ± 173.40] Ω). While the difference in QRS duration between the two groups was not significant, the QRS duration of the high ventricular septum group exhibited a reduced tendency compared with that of the low ventricular group. The corrected QT interval during pacing exhibited a significant difference (440.00 [80.00] ms vs. 520.00 [100.00] ms; p < .05). For the 1-, 3-, 6-month, 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year follow-ups, there was no difference between the threshold of the high ventricular septum group and that of the low ventricular septum group (p > .05). CONCLUSION: High ventricular septum pacing appears to be a safe site for implantation of the Micra pacemaker. It could entail a shorter QRS duration at pacing and could be more physiological than low ventricular septum pacing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Bradyarrhythmia (n=15). Micra leadless pacemaker implantation in the high ventricular septum vs. Micra leadless pacemaker implantation in the low ventricular septum was evaluated on Corrected QT interval during pacing (p=<.05). Implantation of the Micra leadless pacemaker in the high ventricular septum resulted in a significantly shorter corrected QT interval compared to low ventricular septum pacing (440 ms vs 520 ms, p < 0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: