Cargando…

Stylet-driven vs. non-stylet-driven lead implantation for left bundle branch area pacing

FUNDING ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Type of funding sources: None. BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a novel pacing strategy, which overcomes limitations of right ventricular pacing. Conventional stylet-driven and non-stylet-driven leads have been used as a conduction system pacing lead. P...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Haeberlin, A, Seiler, J, Kozhuharov, N, Baldinger, S H, Servatius, H, Madaffari, A, Thalmann, G, Kueffer, T, Muehl, A, Tanner, H, Roten, L, Reichlin, T, Noti, F
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10206842/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/euad122.386
_version_ 1785046316147015680
author Haeberlin, A
Seiler, J
Kozhuharov, N
Baldinger, S H
Servatius, H
Madaffari, A
Thalmann, G
Kueffer, T
Muehl, A
Tanner, H
Roten, L
Reichlin, T
Noti, F
author_facet Haeberlin, A
Seiler, J
Kozhuharov, N
Baldinger, S H
Servatius, H
Madaffari, A
Thalmann, G
Kueffer, T
Muehl, A
Tanner, H
Roten, L
Reichlin, T
Noti, F
author_sort Haeberlin, A
collection PubMed
description FUNDING ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Type of funding sources: None. BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a novel pacing strategy, which overcomes limitations of right ventricular pacing. Conventional stylet-driven and non-stylet-driven leads have been used as a conduction system pacing lead. Procedural outcome data comparing both lead types are, however, scarce. PURPOSE: To compare procedural outcomes during CSP device implantation with respect to the use of stylet-driven vs. non-stylet-driven leads. METHODS: We prospectively assessed 170 consecutive LBBAP lead implantation attempts at our center from 09/2021 to 11/2022. All implanters had previous experience with His-bundle pacing lead implantation using the non-stylet-driven lead and 91% of all systems were implanted by two high-volume device implanters. Successful conduction system pacing was established according to standard criteria (LBBAP: R-wave peak time in V6, V1-V6-interpeak interval, programmed stimulation or visibility of a left bundle potential) and pacing thresholds (<2V/0.5ms). The used leads in this analysis were the non-stylet-driven 3830 SelectSure lead (Medtronic, US) and the stylet-driven Solia (Biotronik, Germany), Ingevity+ (Boston Scientific, US) and Tendril STS (Abbott, US) lead. Patient selection and implantation strategy was at the operator’s discretion. RESULTS: Clinical baseline characteristics, echocardiography/ECG data and indications did not differ between patients, who received a stylet-driven or non-stylet-driven lead (table showing percentages and median values/interquartile ranges). Patients underwent implantation of a non-stylet driven 3830 SelectSure lead in 20% of cases and a stylet-driven lead in 80% of cases (Solia 76%, Ingevity+ 3%, Tendril STS 1%). Electrical outcome data did not differ between lead types. However, procedural success rate was significantly higher using stylet-driven leads (p=0.025) and a trend towards shorter overall intervention duration was observed as well (p=0.1). CONCLUSION: Stylet-driven leads offer higher LBBAP lead implantation success rates while shortening implant duration. [Figure: see text]
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10206842
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102068422023-05-25 Stylet-driven vs. non-stylet-driven lead implantation for left bundle branch area pacing Haeberlin, A Seiler, J Kozhuharov, N Baldinger, S H Servatius, H Madaffari, A Thalmann, G Kueffer, T Muehl, A Tanner, H Roten, L Reichlin, T Noti, F Europace 14.1 - Antibradycardia Pacing FUNDING ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Type of funding sources: None. BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a novel pacing strategy, which overcomes limitations of right ventricular pacing. Conventional stylet-driven and non-stylet-driven leads have been used as a conduction system pacing lead. Procedural outcome data comparing both lead types are, however, scarce. PURPOSE: To compare procedural outcomes during CSP device implantation with respect to the use of stylet-driven vs. non-stylet-driven leads. METHODS: We prospectively assessed 170 consecutive LBBAP lead implantation attempts at our center from 09/2021 to 11/2022. All implanters had previous experience with His-bundle pacing lead implantation using the non-stylet-driven lead and 91% of all systems were implanted by two high-volume device implanters. Successful conduction system pacing was established according to standard criteria (LBBAP: R-wave peak time in V6, V1-V6-interpeak interval, programmed stimulation or visibility of a left bundle potential) and pacing thresholds (<2V/0.5ms). The used leads in this analysis were the non-stylet-driven 3830 SelectSure lead (Medtronic, US) and the stylet-driven Solia (Biotronik, Germany), Ingevity+ (Boston Scientific, US) and Tendril STS (Abbott, US) lead. Patient selection and implantation strategy was at the operator’s discretion. RESULTS: Clinical baseline characteristics, echocardiography/ECG data and indications did not differ between patients, who received a stylet-driven or non-stylet-driven lead (table showing percentages and median values/interquartile ranges). Patients underwent implantation of a non-stylet driven 3830 SelectSure lead in 20% of cases and a stylet-driven lead in 80% of cases (Solia 76%, Ingevity+ 3%, Tendril STS 1%). Electrical outcome data did not differ between lead types. However, procedural success rate was significantly higher using stylet-driven leads (p=0.025) and a trend towards shorter overall intervention duration was observed as well (p=0.1). CONCLUSION: Stylet-driven leads offer higher LBBAP lead implantation success rates while shortening implant duration. [Figure: see text] Oxford University Press 2023-05-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10206842/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/euad122.386 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle 14.1 - Antibradycardia Pacing
Haeberlin, A
Seiler, J
Kozhuharov, N
Baldinger, S H
Servatius, H
Madaffari, A
Thalmann, G
Kueffer, T
Muehl, A
Tanner, H
Roten, L
Reichlin, T
Noti, F
Stylet-driven vs. non-stylet-driven lead implantation for left bundle branch area pacing
title Stylet-driven vs. non-stylet-driven lead implantation for left bundle branch area pacing
title_full Stylet-driven vs. non-stylet-driven lead implantation for left bundle branch area pacing
title_fullStr Stylet-driven vs. non-stylet-driven lead implantation for left bundle branch area pacing
title_full_unstemmed Stylet-driven vs. non-stylet-driven lead implantation for left bundle branch area pacing
title_short Stylet-driven vs. non-stylet-driven lead implantation for left bundle branch area pacing
title_sort stylet-driven vs. non-stylet-driven lead implantation for left bundle branch area pacing
topic 14.1 - Antibradycardia Pacing
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10206842/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/euad122.386
work_keys_str_mv AT haeberlina styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing
AT seilerj styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing
AT kozhuharovn styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing
AT baldingersh styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing
AT servatiush styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing
AT madaffaria styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing
AT thalmanng styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing
AT kueffert styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing
AT muehla styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing
AT tannerh styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing
AT rotenl styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing
AT reichlint styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing
AT notif styletdrivenvsnonstyletdrivenleadimplantationforleftbundlebranchareapacing