
Is ventricular sensing always right, when it is left?
Author(s) -
Biffi Mauro,
de Zan Giulia,
Massaro Giulia,
Angeletti Andrea,
Martignani Cristian,
Boriani Giuseppe,
Diemberger Igor,
Ziacchi Matteo
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
clinical cardiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.263
H-Index - 72
eISSN - 1932-8737
pISSN - 0160-9289
DOI - 10.1002/clc.23033
Subject(s) - cardiac resynchronization therapy , medicine , cardiology , qrs complex , heart failure , lead (geology) , implantable cardioverter defibrillator , artificial cardiac pacemaker , ejection fraction , geomorphology , geology
Background Ventricular sensing in transvenous cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) occurs conventionally from the right ventricular (RV) channel, though it evolved from epicardial sensing both in pacemakers and implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators (ICDs). Hypothesis The objective of this study was to observe the reliability of left ventricular (LV) sensing by transvenous leads placed in coronary veins. Methods LV leads were used for sensing and arrhythmia detection in clinical situations where placement of an RV lead across the tricuspid valve was either not preferred or not feasible, or RV signal was unsuitable for arrhythmia detection, or in the event of sensing failure of an RV lead under advisory in cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRTD) recipients. Results Thirty‐seven patients had an IS‐1 LV lead connected to the RV port of CIEDs (17 pacemakers, 5 cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker [CRTP], 2 ICDs, and 13 CRTDs). Along a median 41 (25‐67) months follow‐up, lead performance remained stable; there were neither undersensing nor oversensing of non‐cardiac signals. VT/VF were correctly detected and terminated by ATP and shocks (one and three patients, respectively); no inappropriate arrhythmia detection. Device reprogramming occurred in four CRTD recipients because of transient counting the QRS (short intervals) when paced in LV‐only, and in two with T‐wave oversensing. Conclusions Ventricular sensing by an LV lead is feasible in transvenous devices. Sensing programmability is an unmet need: to fix RV lead sensing issues in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) recipients at no risk of infection (no pocket opening); to avoid interaction with the tricuspid valve; to avoid lead redundancy in the vasculature. Moreover, it will be mandatory owing to the loss of lead interchangeability due to the adoption of DF‐4 and quadripolar leads.