BACKGROUND: Continuous deep septal pacing and signal recording during implantation of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) lead enables to monitor beat-to-beat changes of electrocardiogram (ECG) and myocardial current of injury (COI) as the lead crosses the septum. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to characterize patterns of continuous QRS, ST-T, and COI change for monitoring of the lead depth and instantaneous determination of the obtained capture type (LBBP vs left ventricular septal pacing [LVSP]). METHODS: The ECG and COI during lead implantation were scrutinized for sudden changes of V6 R-wave peak time, V1 initial and terminal R-wave amplitude, V3-V6 R-wave amplitude, repolarization pattern and S-wave amplitude in I, V5-V6, and COI drop. The sudden and gradual transition patterns were diagnosed depending on the presence or absence of the above beat-to-beat ECG phenomena, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 212 pacemaker recipients were analyzed; LBBP and LVSP were obtained in 77.4% and 22.6%, respectively. There were 4.7 ± 2.1 and 0.2 ± 0.6 beat-to-beat phenomena in LBBP and LVSP patients, respectively. The sudden transition pattern, recognized in 80.7%, had sensitivity and specificity for LBBP diagnosis of 98.8% and 81.2%, respectively. A sudden drop of COI (29.4 ± 8.5 mV to 12.8 ± 4.9 mV) was observed in 53.9% patients (LBBP was simultaneously obtained in 92.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Capture of left bundle branch during lead penetration is a beat-to-beat phenomenon. Two transseptal transition patterns were identified: 1) sudden, which is typical for obtaining LBBP; and 2) gradual, which is typical for obtaining LVSP. A sudden COI drop, a very observable phenomenon, also identified reaching the left subendocardial area.

• Klíčová slova
• continuous pacing, current of injury, left bundle branch pacing, left ventricular septal pacing, transseptal patterns,
• MeSH
• blokáda Tawarova raménka patofyziologie   terapie   MeSH
• elektrokardiografie * MeSH
• Hisův svazek patofyziologie   MeSH
• kardiostimulace umělá metody   MeSH
• kardiostimulátor MeSH
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• senioři nad 80 let MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• srdeční septum patofyziologie   MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mužské pohlaví MeSH
• senioři nad 80 let MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• ženské pohlaví MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

BACKGROUND: Targets for right-sided conduction system pacing (CSP) include His bundle and right bundle branch. Electrocardiographic patterns, diagnostic criteria, and outcomes of right bundle branch pacing (RBBP) are not known. OBJECTIVE: Our aims were to delineate electrocardiographic and electrophysiological characteristics of RBBP and to compare outcomes between RBBP and His bundle pacing (HBP). METHODS: Patients with confirmed right CSP were divided according to the conduction system potential to QRS complex interval at the pacing lead implantation site. Six hypothesized RBBP criteria as well as pacing parameters, echocardiographic outcomes, and all-cause mortality were analyzed. RESULTS: All analyzed criteria discriminated between HBP and RBBP: double QRS complex transition during the threshold test, selective paced QRS complex different from conducted QRS complex, stimulus to selective-QRS complex > potential-QRS complex, small increase in V6 R-wave peak time (V6RWPT) during QRS complex transition, equal capture thresholds of CSP and myocardium, and stimulus-V6RWPT > potential-V6RWPT (adopted as the diagnostic standard). According to the last criterion, RBBP was observed in 19.2% of patients (64 of 326) who had been targeted for HBP, present mainly among patients with potential to QRS complex interval <35 ms (90.6% [48 of 53]) and occasionally among the remaining patients (5.6% [16 of 273]). RBBP was characterized by longer QRS complex (by 10.5 ms), longer V6RWPT (by 11.6 ms), and better sensing (by 2.6 mV) compared with HBP. During a median follow-up duration of 29 months, no differences in capture threshold, echocardiographic outcomes, or mortality were found. CONCLUSION: RBBP has distinct features that separate it from HBP and is observed in approximately a fifth of patients in whom HBP is intended.

• Klíčová slova
• Capture criteria, Conduction system pacing, ECG, His bundle pacing, Right bundle branch pacing,
• MeSH
• echokardiografie MeSH
• elektrokardiografie MeSH
• Hisův svazek MeSH
• kardiostimulace umělá * MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• nemoci převodního systému srdečního MeSH
• převodní systém srdeční * MeSH
• výsledek terapie MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

AIMS: We hypothesized that during left bundle branch (LBB) area pacing, the various possible combinations of direct capture/non-capture of the septal myocardium and the LBB result in distinct patterns of right and left ventricular activation. This could translate into different combinations of R-wave peak time (RWPT) in V1 and V6. Consequently, the V6-V1 interpeak interval could differentiate the three types of LBB area capture: non-selective (ns-)LBB, selective (s-)LBB, and left ventricular septal (LVS). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with unquestionable evidence of LBB capture were included. The V6-V1 interpeak interval, V6RWPT, and V1RWPT were compared between different types of LBB area capture. A total of 468 patients from two centres were screened, with 124 patients (239 electrocardiograms) included in the analysis. Loss of LVS capture resulted in an increase in V1RWPT by ≥15 ms but did not impact V6RWPT. Loss of LBB capture resulted in an increase in V6RWPT by ≥15 ms but only minimally influenced V1RWPT. Consequently, the V6-V1 interval was longest during s-LBB capture (62.3 ± 21.4 ms), intermediate during ns-LBB capture (41.3 ± 14.0 ms), and shortest during LVS capture (26.5 ± 8.6 ms). The optimal value of the V6-V1 interval value for the differentiation between ns-LBB and LVS capture was 33 ms (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 84.7%). A specificity of 100% for the diagnosis of LBB capture was obtained with a cut-off value of >44 ms. CONCLUSION: The V6-V1 interpeak interval is a promising novel criterion for the diagnosis of LBB area capture.

• Klíčová slova
• Conduction system pacing, Electrocardiogram, Left bundle branch capture, Left bundle branch pacing, Left ventricular septal capture,
• MeSH
• elektrokardiografie metody   MeSH
• Hisův svazek * MeSH
• kardiostimulace umělá metody   MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mezikomorová přepážka * MeSH
• převodní systém srdeční MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) based on the conventional biventricular pacing (BiV-CRT) technique sometimes results in broad QRS complex and suboptimal response. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the feasibility and outcomes of CRT based on left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP, in lieu of the right ventricular lead) combined with coronary venous left ventricular pacing in an international multicenter study. METHODS: LBBAP-optimized CRT (LOT-CRT) was attempted in nonconsecutive patients with CRT indications. Addition of the LBBA (or coronary venous) lead was at the discretion of the implanting physician, who was guided by suboptimal paced QRS complex, and/or on clinical grounds. RESULTS: LOT-CRT was successful in 91 of 112 patients (81%). The baseline characteristics were as follows: mean age 70 ± 11 years, female 22 (20%), left ventricular ejection fraction 28.7% ± 9.8%, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter 62 ± 9 mm, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level 5821 ± 8193 pg/mL, left bundle branch block 47 (42%), nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay 25 (22%), right ventricular pacing 26 (23%), and right bundle branch block 14 (12%). The procedure characteristics were as follows: mean fluoroscopy time 27.3 ± 22 minutes, LBBAP capture threshold 0.8 ± 0.5 V @ 0.5 ms, and R-wave amplitude 10 mV. LOT-CRT resulted in significantly greater narrowing of QRS complex from 182 ± 25 ms at baseline to 144 ± 22 ms (P < .0001) than did BiV-CRT (170 ± 30 ms; P < .0001) and LBBAP (162 ± 23 ms; P < .0001). At follow-up of ≥3 months, the ejection fraction improved to 37% ± 12%, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter decreased to 59 ± 9 mm, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level decreased to 2514 ± 3537 pg/mL, pacing parameters were stable, and clinical improvement was noted in 76% of patients (New York Heart Association class 2.9 vs 1.9). CONCLUSION: LOT-CRT is feasible and safe and provides greater electrical resynchronization as compared with BiV-CRT and could be an alternative, especially when only suboptimal electrical resynchronization is obtained with BiV-CRT. Randomized controlled trials comparing LOT-CRT and BiV-CRT are needed.

• Klíčová slova
• Biventricular pacing, Cardiac resynchronization therapy, Heart failure, Left bundle branch area pacing, QRS narrowing,
• MeSH
• elektrokardiografie metody   MeSH
• funkce levé komory srdeční MeSH
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• senioři nad 80 let MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• srdeční resynchronizační terapie * metody   MeSH
• tepový objem MeSH
• výsledek terapie MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• senioři nad 80 let MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• ženské pohlaví MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• komentáře MeSH

BACKGROUND: During nonselective His bundle (HB) pacing, it is clinically important to confirm His bundle capture versus right ventricular septal (RVS) capture. The present study aimed to validate the hypothesis that during HB capture, left ventricular lateral wall activation time, approximated by the V6 R-wave peak time (V6 RWPT), will not be longer than the corresponding activation time during native conduction. METHODS: Consecutive patients with permanent HB pacing were recruited; cases with abnormal His-ventricle interval or left bundle branch block were excluded. Two corresponding intervals were compared: stimulus-V6 RWPT and native HB potential-V6 RWPT. The difference between these two intervals (delta V6 RWPT), which was diagnostic of lack of HB capture, was identified using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: A total of 723 electrocardiograms (ECGs) (219 with native rhythm, 172 with selective HB, 215 with nonselective HB, and 117 with RVS capture) were obtained from 219 patients. The native HB-V6 RWPT, nonselective-, and selective-HB paced V6 RWPT were nearly equal, while RVS V6 RWPT was 32.0 (±9.5) ms longer. The ROC curve analysis indicated delta V6 RWPT > 12 ms as diagnostic of lack of HB capture (specificity of 99.1% and sensitivity of 100%). A blinded observer correctly diagnosed 96.7% (321/332) of ECGs using this criterion. CONCLUSIONS: We validated a novel criterion for HB capture that is based on the physiological left ventricular activation time as an individualized reference. HB capture can be diagnosed when paced V6 RWPT does not exceed the value obtained during native conduction by more than 12 ms, while longer paced V6 RWPT indicates RVS capture.

• Klíčová slova
• His bundle pacing, electrocardiogram, loss of capture, nonselective pacing,
• MeSH
• blokáda Tawarova raménka diagnóza   terapie   MeSH
• elektrokardiografie MeSH
• Hisův svazek * MeSH
• kardiostimulace umělá * MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• srdeční komory diagnostické zobrazování   MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

BACKGROUND: During left bundle branch (LBB) area pacing, it is important to confirm that capture of the LBB, and not just capture of only adjacent left ventricular (LV) myocardium, has been achieved. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to establish electrocardiographic (ECG) criteria for LBB capture. We hypothesized that because LBB pacing results in physiological depolarization of the LV, then the native QRS can serve as a reference for diagnosis of LBB capture in the same patient. METHODS: Only patients with evidence of LBB capture (QRS morphology transition) were included. Several QRS characteristics were compared between the native rhythm and different types of LBB area capture. RESULTS: A total of 357 ECGs (124 patients) were analyzed: 118 with native rhythm, 124 with nonselective LBB capture, 69 with selective LBB capture, and 46 with LV septal capture. Our hypotheses that during LBB capture the paced V6 R-wave peak time (RWPT; measured from QRS onset) equals the native V6 RWPT and that the paced V6 RWPT (measured from the stimulus) equals the LBB potential to V6 R-wave peak interval were positively validated. Criteria based on these rules had sensitivity and specificity of 88.2%-98.0% and 85.7%-95.4%, respectively. Moreover, 100% specific V6 RWPT cutoff for LBB capture diagnosis in patients with narrow QRS/right bundle branch block was determined to be 74 ms. CONCLUSION: We showed equivalency of LV activation times on ECG during native and paced LBB conduction. Therefore, if V6 RWPT is longer during pacing, this finding is indicative of lack of LBB capture.

• Klíčová slova
• Electrocardiographic criteria, Left bundle branch pacing, Left ventricular activation time, Physiological pacing, R-wave peak time,
• MeSH
• blokáda Tawarova raménka patofyziologie   terapie   MeSH
• elektrokardiografie metody   MeSH
• Hisův svazek fyziologie   MeSH
• kardiostimulace umělá metody   MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• převodní systém srdeční patofyziologie   MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• srdeční frekvence fyziologie   MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• mužské pohlaví MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• ženské pohlaví MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• multicentrická studie MeSH
• práce podpořená grantem MeSH

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to compare the acute differences in left ventricular (LV) function and mechanical synchrony during nonselective His bundle pacing (ns-HBP) versus selective His bundle pacing (s-HBP) using strain echocardiography. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients with permanent His bundle pacing, in whom it was possible to obtain both s-HBP and ns-HBP, were studied in two centers. In each patient, echocardiography was performed sequentially during s-HBP and ns-HBP. Speckle-tracking echocardiography parameters were analyzed: Global longitudinal strain (GLS), the time delay between peak systolic strain in the basal septal and basal lateral segments (BS-BL delay), peak strain dispersion (PSD) and strain delay index. Right ventricle function was assessed using tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) and tissue Doppler velocity of the lateral tricuspid annulus (S'). A total of 69 patients (age: 75.6 ± 10.5 years; males: 75%) were enrolled. There were no differences in LV ejection fraction and GLS between s-HBP and ns-HBP modes: 59% versus 60%, and -15.6% versus -15.7%, respectively; as well as no difference in BS-BL delay and strain delay index. The PSD value was higher in the ns-HBP group than in the s-HBP group with the most pronounced difference in the basal LV segments. No differences in right ventricular function parameters (TAPSE and S') were found. CONCLUSION: The ns-HBP and s-HBP modes seem comparable regarding ventricular function. The dyssynchrony parameters were significantly higher during ns-HBP, however, the difference seems modest and clarification of its impact on LV function requires a larger long-term study.

• Klíčová slova
• dyssynchrony, left ventricular function, nonselective His bundle pacing, selective His bundle pacing, speckle strain echocardiography,
• MeSH
• echokardiografie MeSH
• funkce pravé komory srdeční MeSH
• Hisův svazek * diagnostické zobrazování   MeSH
• kardiostimulace umělá * MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• tepový objem MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• mužské pohlaví MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• práce podpořená grantem MeSH

AIMS: Permanent His-bundle (HB) pacing is usually accompanied by simultaneous capture of the adjacent right ventricular (RV) myocardium-this is described as a non-selective (ns)-HB pacing. It is of clinical importance to confirm HB capture using standard electrocardiogram (ECG). Our aim was to identify ECG criteria for loss of HB capture during ns-HB pacing. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with permanent HB pacing were recruited. Electrocardiograms during ns-HB pacing and loss of HB capture (RV-only capture) were obtained. Electrocardiogram criteria for loss/presence of HB capture were identified. In the validation phase, these criteria and the 'HB ECG algorithm' were tested using a separate, sizable set of ECGs. A total of 353 ECG (226 ns-HB and 128 RV-only) were obtained from 226 patients with permanent HB pacing devices. QRS notch/slur in left ventricular leads and R-wave peak time (RWPT) in lead V6 were identified as the best features for differentiation. The 'HB ECG algorithm' based on these features correctly classified 87.1% of cases with sensitivity and specificity of 93.2% and 83.9%, respectively. The criteria for definitive diagnosis of ns-HB capture (no QRS slur/notch in Leads I, V1, V4-V6, and the V6 RWPT ≤ 100 ms) presented 100% specificity. CONCLUSION: A novel ECG algorithm for the diagnosis of loss of HB capture and criteria for definitive confirmation of HB capture were formulated and validated. The algorithm might be useful during follow-up and the criteria for definitive confirmation of ns-HB capture offer a simple and reliable ancillary procedural endpoint during HB device implantation.

• Klíčová slova
• Electrocardiogram, His-bundle pacing, Loss of capture, Non-selective pacing,
• MeSH
• algoritmy * MeSH
• atrioventrikulární blokáda terapie   MeSH
• elektrokardiografie metody   MeSH
• fibrilace síní terapie   MeSH
• Hisův svazek * MeSH
• kardiostimulace umělá * MeSH
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• senioři nad 80 let MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• srdeční selhání terapie   MeSH
• syndrom chorého sinu terapie   MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mužské pohlaví MeSH
• senioři nad 80 let MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• ženské pohlaví MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• validační studie MeSH