Key result
LBBP with anodal capture narrows QRS duration but fails to improve acute hemodynamics.
Why the study?
LBBP typically causes delayed right ventricular activation, and while anodal capture can advance it, the underlying mechanism and potential haemodynamic benefit remained unknown.
Does achieving anodal capture during non-selective left bundle branch pacing improve ventricular activation times and acute haemodynamics?
Does achieving anodal capture during non-selective left bundle branch pacing improve ventricular activation times and acute haemodynamics?
Programming anodal capture during left bundle branch pacing shortens QRS duration by stimulating the right ventricular septal myocardium but offers no acute haemodynamic benefit and significantly increases battery drain.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Anodal capture in LBBP may be unnecessary for acute hemodynamic gain; leaves open effects on long-term remodeling or outcomes.
AIMS: Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) can deliver physiological left ventricular activation, but typically at the cost of delayed right ventricular (RV) activation. Right ventricular activation can be advanced through anodal capture, but there is uncertainty regarding the mechanism by which this is achieved, and it is not known whether this produces haemodynamic benefit. METHODS AND RESULTS: We recruited patients with LBBP leads in whom anodal capture eliminated the terminal R-wave in lead V1. Ventricular activation pattern, timing, and high-precision acute haemodynamic response were studied during LBBP with and without anodal capture. We recruited 21 patients with a mean age of 67 years, of whom 14 were males. We measured electrocardiogram timings and haemodynamics in all patients, and in 16, we also performed non-invasive mapping. Ventricular epicardial propagation maps demonstrated that RV septal myocardial capture, rather than right bundle capture, was the mechanism for earlier RV activation. With anodal capture, QRS duration and total ventricular activation times were shorter (116 ± 12 vs. 129 ± 14 ms, P < 0.01 and 83 ± 18 vs. 90 ± 15 ms, P = 0.01). This required higher outputs (3.6 ± 1.9 vs. 0.6 ± 0.2 V, P < 0.01) but without additional haemodynamic benefit (mean difference -0.2 ± 3.8 mmHg compared with pacing without anodal capture, P = 0.2). CONCLUSION: Left bundle branch pacing with anodal capture advances RV activation by stimulating the RV septal myocardium. However, this requires higher outputs and does not improve acute haemodynamics. Aiming for anodal capture may therefore not be necessary.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ali et al. (2023) studied Patients requiring pacing (bradycardia or cardiac resynchronization therapy) (n=21). Non-selective left bundle branch pacing with anodal capture vs. Non-selective left bundle branch pacing without anodal capture was evaluated on Acute haemodynamic response (mean change in systolic blood pressure) (mean difference -0.2 mmHg, p=0.2). Left bundle branch pacing with anodal capture reduced QRS duration but did not improve acute haemodynamics compared with pacing without anodal capture (mean difference -0.2 mmHg, P=0.2), while requiring higher pacing outputs.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: