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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |