This website is intended for healthcare professionals only

Trending Topic

16 mins

Trending Topic

Developed by Touch
Mark CompleteCompleted
BookmarkBookmarked

Hypertension is the leading modifiable risk factor for global cardiovascular disease, responsible for an estimated 10.8 million deaths and more than 200 million disability-adjusted life years annually.1 Despite the availability of effective pharmacological and lifestyle interventions, prevalence continues to rise, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where over three-quarters of all cases now occur.2 The condition’s […]

116/Safety and feasibility of His bundle pacing at a tertiary cardiac centre

A Merghani (Presenting Author) - Barts Heart Centre, London, UK; C Monkhouse - Barts Heart Centre, London, UK;A Jacinto - Barts Heart Centre, London, UK; J Behar - Barts Heart Centre, London, UK; S Ahsan - Barts Heart Centre, London, UK; R Providencia - Barts Heart Centre, London, UK; MD Lowe - Barts Heart Centre, London, UK; A Chow - Barts Heart Centre, London, UK; P Moore - Barts Heart Centre, London, UK; A Muthumala - Barts Heart Centre, London, UK
2 mins
Share
Facebook
X (formerly Twitter)
LinkedIn
Via Email
Mark CompleteCompleted
BookmarkBookmarked
Copy LinkLink Copied
Published Online: Oct 3rd 2008 European Journal of Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology. 2019;5(Suppl. 1):abstr116
Select a Section…
1

Article

Introduction: Permanent His Bundle pacing has been reported as a promising alternative to conventional right ventricular and biventricular pacing due to its ability to deliver and potentially correct intrinsic His-Purkinje conduction. We performed a medium term follow up study of patients who underwent His Bundle Pacing (HBP) to examine safety, feasibility and stability of lead parameters.
Methods: HBP was performed using a Medtronic 3830 SelectSecure lead through either a Medtronic C304 deflectable guide catheter or a C315 fixed curve guide catheter. A total of 15 patients underwent HBP, including 11 (73%) males with a mean age of 71.2 ± 9 years. Thirteen patients had documented left ventricular dysfunction. ECG abnormalities included left bundle branch block (n=4), right bundle branch block (n=3), 1st degree AV block (n=2), Mobitz type 2 second degree AV block (n=2),
complete heart block (n=3) or atrial fibrillation prior to AV node ablation (n=1). All patients had a RV pacing/defibrillator lead. Patients were followed up for a mean duration of 29.1 ± 9.1 weeks.
Results: Mean fluoroscopy time was 20.2 ± 16.4 minutes and mean radiation dose was 8 mG. Selective His capture was achieved in 6 (40%) of patients. There was no statistically significant difference between the mean threshold at implant and follow up, 1.4 ± 1.69 volts at 1 ms versus 1.27 ± 1 volts at 1 ms respectively (p=0.69) (see Figure 1). Sensing was 5.3 ± 5.4 millivolts at implant with no statistically significant difference at follow-up (p=0.4). Lead impedance was also similar at implant and follow-up, 593 ± 179 Ohms versus 423 ± 68 Ohms respectively, p=0.18. There were no reported complications during all procedures and at follow up.
Conclusion: In our case series His Bundle Pacing was found to be safe, feasible and associated with stable lead parameters during follow-up. There are several potential roles for HBP in clinical practice. Randomised control studies are necessary to define these roles and assess long term clinical efficacy.

2

Further Resources

Share
Facebook
X (formerly Twitter)
LinkedIn
Via Email
Mark CompleteCompleted
BookmarkBookmarked
Copy LinkLink Copied
Close Popup