Key result
Left bundle branch area pacing combining multi-lead ECG monitoring and intracavitary ECG was successfully achieved without an electrophysiological multichannel recorder in 88% of patients.
Why the study?
LBBaP is difficult to perform in primary hospitals lacking an electrophysiological multichannel recorder, creating a need for a simpler approach using surface ECG monitoring and intracavity ECG.
Does combining multi-lead ECG monitoring and intracavitary ECG of a pacing system analyzer allow feasible and effective LBBaP without an electrophysiological multichannel recorder in patients with bradycardia?
Observational (n=50)
Does combining multi-lead ECG monitoring and intracavitary ECG of a pacing system analyzer allow feasible and effective LBBaP without an electrophysiological multichannel recorder in patients with bradycardia?
Combining multi-lead ECG monitoring and intracavitary ECG of a pacing system analyzer is a feasible and effective alternative for performing LBBaP in settings lacking an electrophysiological multichannel recorder.
BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) as an alternative method for delivering physiological pacing, is difficult for many primary hospitals that lack the electrophysiological multichannel recorder to carry out. We hope to find a simple and feasible method that combines the multi-lead surface electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring and the intracavity ECG of the pacing programmer to achieve LBBaP. METHODS: A total of 50 patients with bradycardia indications who attempted permanent pacemaker implantation were included in this study. We referred to multi-lead surface ECG monitoring and pacing system analyzer (PSA), combined with the nine-zone pacing method of the LBBaP, to complete LBBaP. We assessed multiple parameters to verify whether the LBBaP was successfully achieved and used univariable analysis of variance for repeated measures to judge the feasibility and effectiveness of LBBaP without the electrophysiological multichannel recorder. RESULTS: LBBaP was successfully archived without the electrophysiological multichannel recorder in 44 of 50 patients (88%). In the study, paced QRS duration and the stimulus to peak left ventricular activation time (Sti-LVAT) were 117.04 ± 10.34 ms and 71.10 ± 7.91 ms and had no significant changes in the 3-month follow-up. The unipolar pacing threshold and R-wave amplitudes were 0.85 ± 0.32 V and 10.36 ± 5.24 mV at baseline respectively, which also showed stability during the 1-month and 3-month follow-up. During the 3-month follow-up, no lead-related complication was recorded. CONCLUSION: It is effective and feasible to achieve LBBaP combining the multi-lead ECG monitoring and the intracavitary ECG of PSA without the electrophysiological multichannel recorder, which could be an alternative to perform LBBaP.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Bradycardia (n=50). Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) combining multi-lead ECG monitoring and intracavitary ECG of PSA was evaluated on Successful achievement of LBBaP without the electrophysiological multichannel recorder. Left bundle branch area pacing combining multi-lead ECG monitoring and intracavitary ECG was successfully achieved without an electrophysiological multichannel recorder in 88% of patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: