Premium
Permanent His bundle pacing using a new tridimensional delivery sheath and a standard active fixation pacing lead: The telescopic technique
Author(s) -
Zingarini Gianluca,
Notaristefano Francesco,
Spighi Lorenzo,
Bagliani Giuseppe,
Cavallini Claudio
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.193
H-Index - 138
eISSN - 1540-8167
pISSN - 1045-3873
DOI - 10.1111/jce.14869
Subject(s) - medicine , lead (geology) , fluoroscopy , atrioventricular block , stylet , cardiology , qrs complex , bundle , sick sinus syndrome , anesthesia , surgery , materials science , geomorphology , composite material , geology
Permanent His bundle pacing (PHBP) preserves physiological ventricular activation but technical difficulties have limited its widespread use. We report the first experience of PHBP performed with a new specific delivery sheath (Selectra 3D, Biotronik, Berlin, Germany) and an extendable‐retractable active screw, stylet‐driven pacing lead (Solia S 60, Biotronik). Methods and Results Clinical, procedural, ECG, and electrical data from consecutive patients undergoing PHBP with this system were collected at implantation, and follow‐up was performed after 1 month. Our cohort included 17 patients (71% males; mean age 76 ± 8 years) undergoing permanent pacing for sick sinus syndrome (59%) or atrioventricular block (41%). PHBP was successful in 15 (88%) procedures with mean procedure and fluoroscopy times of 63 ± 14 and 13 ± 5 min, respectively. The pacing threshold was 2.1 ± 1.1 V @1 ms and the sensed R‐wave amplitude was 5.6 ± 3.5 mV; bipolar and unipolar pacing impedances were 526 ± 115 and 369 ± 109 Ω, respectively. At discharge, neither procedure‐related complications nor lead dislodgement or pacing capture failures was reported. After 1 month, 14 (93%) patients still demonstrated His bundle stimulation and one (7%) lost His bundle capture but the lead revision was not necessary because the myocardial pacing threshold was stable. Follow‐up threshold (2 ± 1.1 vs. 2.3 ± 1.2 V@1 ms, p = .239) and sensed R‐wave amplitude (5.6 ± 3.4 vs. 6.4 ± 2.5, p = .403) was unchanged compared to the acute phase. Conclusion PHBP performed with a standard active fixation pacing lead and a new delivery sheath for His pacing is feasible, safe and demonstrates clinically acceptable electric performance both at implantation and after 1 month.