PO05-46: Novel insights into activation pattern along a quadripolar left ventricular lead in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients: Effect of right ventricular pacing vs. normal sinus rhythm

Authors

David O'Donnell
Carlo Pappone
Seung-Jung Park
Christophe Leclercq
Maurizio Lunati
Peter Lercher
Roberto Rordorf
Maurizio Landolina
Luke C. McSpadden
Kyungmoo Ryu
Jagmeet P Singh
Imran K. Niazi, Advocate Aurora HealthFollow

Recommended Citation

O'Donnell D, Pappone C, Park SJ, et al. PO05-46: Novel Insights Into Activation Pattern Along A Quadripolar Left Ventricular Lead In Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Patients: Effect Of Right Ventricular Pacing Vs. Normal Sinus Rhythm. Heart Rhythm. 2016; 13(5):S444-445.

Affiliations

Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke's Medical Centers

Abstract

Introduction: The nature and significance of electrical delay between right (RV) and left ventricular (LV) pacing leads are poorly understood. We evaluated differences in RV-LV electrical delay and LV activation pattern along a quadripolar LV lead during RV pacing (RVP) and normal sinus rhythm (NSR).

Methods: Electrical delays between the RV and all 4 poles of the LV lead (D1, M2, M3, and P4, distal to proximal) were measured during RVP and NSR in 164 pts receiving a CRT implant with a quadripolar lead. The activation pattern was defined by the order of earliest to latest LV electrode activation, either sequential distal-to-proximal, or sequential proximal-to distal, or non-sequential.

Results: The average RV-LV electrical display was significantly longer during RVP than NSR (each p≤0.001, Fig A). The latest activating electrode was frequently D1 of P4 during both RVP

(D1: 32%, P4: 42%) and NSR (D1: 34%, P4: 37%) (Fig B), while the earliest activating electrode was most frequently D1 for both RVP (55%) and NSR (54%) (Fig C). A non-sequential activation pattern was observed in 81/164 (49%) patients during RVP and 77/164 (47%) during NSR (Fig D). A difference in activation pattern between RVP and NSR was observed in 130/164 (79%) patients. RVP produced greater electrical delay between the latest and earliest activating LV electrodes than NSR (24±18 vs. 20±11 ms, p = 0.015).

Conclusions: Activation pattern along a quadripolar LV lead was frequently different between RV pacing and normal sinus rhythm, with RV pacing producing greater delay between early and late sites. These results may have important implications for using conduction delays to optimize CRT programming with a quadripolar LV lead.

Document Type

Abstract