2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2011.03138.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Transseptal Left Ventricular Endocardial Pacing Reduces Dispersion of Ventricular Repolarization

Abstract: CRT with (atrial transseptal) endocardial LV lead placement is associated with repolarization characteristics that are considered to be less arrhythmogenic than those generated by CS (epicardial) LV lead placement. Further work is needed to determine whether these changes translate to a reduction in proarrhythmia.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

3
18
1
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
3
18
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Endocardial pacing has also been shown to result in more rapid ventricular depolarization, shorter global LV activation times, more synchronous LV activation and better acute hemodynamic parameters than epicardial pacing, and may be less arrythmogenic. 21,[32][33][34][35][36] Consistent with the above observations, response to CRT with endocardial pacing in patients who had not responded to epicardial CRT has been reported, and response rates in previous reports of LV endocardial pacing have been high at ≈90%. 9,12,13,20,22,23 During the development of the ventricular transseptal puncture technique, it was found that use of a guidewire combined with radiofrequency energy facilitated a quicker procedure with a more basal or midseptal puncture site.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 73%
“…Endocardial pacing has also been shown to result in more rapid ventricular depolarization, shorter global LV activation times, more synchronous LV activation and better acute hemodynamic parameters than epicardial pacing, and may be less arrythmogenic. 21,[32][33][34][35][36] Consistent with the above observations, response to CRT with endocardial pacing in patients who had not responded to epicardial CRT has been reported, and response rates in previous reports of LV endocardial pacing have been high at ≈90%. 9,12,13,20,22,23 During the development of the ventricular transseptal puncture technique, it was found that use of a guidewire combined with radiofrequency energy facilitated a quicker procedure with a more basal or midseptal puncture site.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 73%
“…The transseptal approach allows the freedom to choose a stimulation site, as opposed to being constrained by the anat- omy of the coronary sinus. LV endocardial pacing appears more physiologic, preserving the transmural activation and repolarization sequence; therefore, it may lower the risk of arrhythmia development (25). Moreover, we have demonstrated that LV endocardial stimulation and optimization of the pacing site significantly improved systolic function compared with standard LV epicardial pacing.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 63%
“…Recent studies in patients that compared the mean QRSd across multiple pacing sites did not report a significant decrease in QRSd or in the time from first-to-last activation of the LV endocardial surface for ENDO-CRT relative to conventional CRT, 5,39,40 whereas a decrease in QRSd was found in human and canine cases when comparing paired transmural pacing sites. 9,41 One possible explanation for the former finding is that CRT patients tend to have a reduced ejection fraction which is associated with eccentric remodeling, and as we have shown in this article, this remodeling type is less sensitive to LV pacing strategy.…”
Section: Comparison With Previous Studiesmentioning
confidence: 77%