No abstract

Introduction: Recent studies have shown that His-bundle pacing could be an alternative in patients requiring cardiac resynchronization therapy as it is comparable or better in terms of amelioration of ventricular activation, narrowing of the QRS complex, or clinical outcomes. However, in case of high threshold at the level of His-bundle or inability to correct conduction through a diseased His-Purkinje system other option should be searched like left bundle pacing. Patient concerns: A 77-year-old man presented to the Emergency Department for dizziness and dizziness and lightheadedness due to an intermittent 2:1 atrioventricular block with a QRS complex morphology of a major left branch block. Diagnosis: Given the documented symptomatic 2:1 AV block, according to the European Guideliness the patient was considered to have a class 1 indication of permanent double chamber cardiostimulation. Interventions: A lead delivery system with a C315 His catheter and a Select Secure 3830 69 cm pacing lead were placed at the His bundle area with important narrowing of the QRS complex but with an unacceptable high threshold. The delivery system was moved towards the apex 1,5 cm and the lead screwed deep into the septum until capture of the left bundle branch was achieved with complete normalization of the conduction troubles. Outcomes: At 3 month follow-up the patient was asymptomatic and the pacing and sensing thresholds remained at same values as during implantation: 0.75/0.4 ms and 14 mV respectively. Conclusion: Left bundle-pacing represents the next step of His-Purkinje system pacing to overcome all difficulties related to His-bundle pacing.

His bundle pacing (HBP) has several pitfalls, such as the inability to identify the His bundle and lack of capture at acceptable thresholds. The majority of data regarding HBP were obtained using a dedicated non-deflectable delivery system. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of cardiac chamber dimensions on permanent HBP procedural outcomes when using this type of fixed-curve catheter. Seventy-two patients subjected to HBP from the 1st of January to the 31st of December 2021 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. The baseline clinical characteristics and echocardiographic measurements of all the cardiac chambers were recorded, as well as procedural outcomes (HB electrogram identification and overall procedural success). During the procedure, the HB electrogram was recorded in 59 patients (81.9%) and successful permanent HBP was achieved in 33 patients, representing 45.8% of all the studied patients. Left atrial (LA) and right atrial (RA) volumes were significantly higher in patients without HB electrogram identification. Only LA and RA volumes were statistically associated with HB electrogram localization, while there was no significant association between the echocardiographic parameters and procedural success. LA volumes above 93 mL and RA volumes above 60 mL had an 8.81 times higher chance of failure to localize the HB electrogram compared with patients with lower volumes (p < 0.001). When considering non-deflectable delivery catheters for HBP, careful preprocedural echocardiographic analysis of the atrial volumes could help in the proper selection of implanting tools, thus optimizing the procedural outcomes and costs.

No abstract

No abstract