Eschalier Romain, Ploux Sylvain, Lumens Joost, Whinnett Zachary, Varma Niraj, Meillet Valentin, Ritter Philippe, Jaïs Pierre, Haïssaguerre Michel, Bordachar Pierre
Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut-Lévêque, CHU Bordeaux, Université Bordeaux, IHU LIRYC, Bordeaux, France; Clermont Université, Université d'Auvergne, Cardio Vascular Interventional Therapy and Imaging (CaVITI), Image Science for Interventional Techniques (ISIT), UMR6284, and CHU Clermont-Ferrand, Cardiology Department, F-63003 Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut-Lévêque, CHU Bordeaux, Université Bordeaux, IHU LIRYC, Bordeaux, France.
Heart Rhythm. 2015 Jan;12(1):137-43. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2014.09.059. Epub 2014 Oct 5.
Left bundle branch block (LBBB) leads to prolonged left ventricular (LV) total activation time (TAT) and ventricular electrical uncoupling (VEU; mean LV activation time minus mean right ventricular [RV] activation time); both have been shown to be preferential targets for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Whether right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP) produces similar ventricular activation patterns has not been well studied.
The purpose of this study was to compare electrical ventricular activation patterns during RVAP and LBBB.
We performed ECG mapping during sinus rhythm, RVAP, and CRT in 24 patients with LBBB.
We observed differences in the electrical activation pattern with RVAP compared to LBBB. During LBBB, RV activation occurred rapidly; in contrast, RV activation was prolonged during RVAP (46 ± 21 ms vs 69 ± 17 ms, P <.001). There was no significant difference in LVTAT; however, differences in conduction pattern were observed. During LBBB, LV activation was circumferential, whereas with RVAP, LV activation proceeded from apex to base. Differences in the number, size, and orientation of lines of slow conduction also were observed. With LBBB, VEU was nearly twice as long as during RVAP (73 ± 12 ms vs 38 ± 21 ms, P <.001). CRT resulted in a greater reduction in VEU relative to LBBB activation (P <.001).
RVAP produces significant differences in ventricular activation characteristics compared to LBBB. Significantly less VEU occurs with RVAP, and as a result CRT produces a smaller relative reduction in VEU. This may explain the finding that CRT appears to be more effective in patients with LBBB than in those who were upgraded because of high percentages of RV pacing.
左束支传导阻滞(LBBB)会导致左心室(LV)总激活时间(TAT)延长和心室电失耦联(VEU;左心室平均激活时间减去右心室[RV]平均激活时间);这两者均已被证明是心脏再同步治疗(CRT)的优先靶点。右心室心尖部起搏(RVAP)是否会产生相似的心室激活模式尚未得到充分研究。
本研究旨在比较RVAP和LBBB期间的心室电激活模式。
我们对24例LBBB患者在窦性心律、RVAP和CRT期间进行了心电图标测。
我们观察到与LBBB相比,RVAP时电激活模式存在差异。在LBBB期间,右心室激活迅速;相比之下,RVAP期间右心室激活延长(46±21毫秒对69±17毫秒,P<.001)。左心室总激活时间无显著差异;然而,观察到传导模式存在差异。在LBBB期间,左心室激活是环形的,而在RVAP时,左心室激活从心尖向心底进行。还观察到缓慢传导线的数量、大小和方向存在差异。与LBBB相比,VEU在RVAP时几乎缩短了一半(73±12毫秒对38±21毫秒,P<.001)。相对于LBBB激活,CRT导致VEU的降低幅度更大(P<.001)。
与LBBB相比,RVAP在心室激活特征方面产生显著差异。RVAP时VEU显著减少,因此CRT导致的VEU相对降低幅度较小。这可能解释了以下发现:CRT在LBBB患者中似乎比因右心室起搏比例高而升级的患者更有效。