Key result
Deep septal pacing with electrical optimization narrows QRS duration by ~34 ms with sustained 1-year improvement.
Why the study?
Management of patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, preserved LVEF, and high anticipated ventricular pacing burden is challenging due to limited guidance from current pacing guidelines.
Does deep septal pacing combined with individualized interventricular electrical optimization improve electrical parameters and clinical status in a patient with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, preserved ejection fraction, and high anticipated pacing burden?
Case Report (n=1)
No
Does deep septal pacing combined with individualized interventricular electrical optimization improve electrical parameters and clinical status in a patient with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, preserved ejection fraction, and high anticipated pacing burden?
Absolute Event Rate: 134% vs 168%
In a patient with structurally complex hypertrophic cardiomyopathy requiring ventricular pacing, deep septal pacing coupled with individualized ECG-guided interventricular programming successfully optimized electrical activation and was associated with clinical improvement.
Supports feasibility of deep septal pacing with VV optimization in HCM; leaves open need for prospective validation.
Management of patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, and high anticipated ventricular pacing burden remains challenging because current pacing guidelines provide limited direction for this clinical scenario. A 68-year-old man with non-obstructive HCM, symptomatic 2:1 atrioventricular block, and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia underwent implantation of a cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) system using a lumenless septal pacing lead connected to the LV port. Lead implantation proved technically challenging owing to marked septal hypertrophy (31 mm) with increased tissue resistance during lead advancement; despite repeated attempts at different septal sites, further lead advancement could not be achieved, and the final lead position remained within the deep interventricular septum. Stepwise lead advancement resulted in progressive shortening of the V6 R-wave peak time from 114 ms to 87 ms and paced QRS narrowing from 168 ms to 143 ms with deep septal pacing alone. Although the clinical trajectory was favorable, electrical assessment at the two-week follow-up demonstrated a residual 39-ms V6-to-V1 activation delay with deep septal pacing alone. Individualized ECG-guided VV optimization was therefore performed using coordinated deep septal and right ventricular pacing, bringing V6-to-V1 activation timing toward near-equalization with septal pre-excitation of 20 ms and further reducing QRS duration from 143 ms to 134 ms. At one month, NYHA functional class improved from III to I-II and NT-proBNP decreased from 1,868 to 369 pg/mL, with both remaining stable at one year. The clinical improvement was likely multifactorial; the specific contribution of VV optimization to this outcome could not be determined from a single case. This case highlights the potential value of device configurations that enable systematic post-implant interventricular electrical optimization as part of individualized programming in patients with structurally complex substrates and high anticipated pacing burden.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ali Hakan Konuş (2026) conducted a case report in Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (n=1). Deep septal pacing and individualized interventricular electrical optimization vs. Baseline was evaluated on QRS duration. Deep septal pacing combined with individualized interventricular electrical optimization reduced QRS duration from 168 ms to 134 ms and was associated with sustained clinical and biochemical improvement at one year.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: