Image-guided device therapy: An opportunity for personalized medicine
- PDF / 161,021 Bytes
- 3 Pages / 593.972 x 792 pts Page_size
- 60 Downloads / 160 Views
Division of Cardiology and The Heart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA
Received Jul 30, 2020; accepted Jul 30, 2020 doi:10.1007/s12350-020-02327-6
See related article, https://doi.org/10.10 07/s12350-020-02111-6.
The implantation of the first internal cardiac pacemaker in 1958 heralded the era of implantable cardiac devices1. The subsequent evolution of the cardiac pacemaker through stages of progressive sophistication reflects still extant efforts to mimic the physiology of native conduction. The right ventricular (RV) apex has traditionally been used as the preferred site of pacing due to the relative ease of access and the favorable logistics of securing the pacemaker lead in the trabeculae. Single-chamber RV pacing was followed by dualchamber pacing to maintain atrioventricular synchrony. However, studies have demonstrated deleterious effects of RV apical pacing on left ventricular (LV) function due to mechanical dyssynchrony resulting from the spread of the activation wavefront through the myocardium rather than specialized conduction tissue2. The iatrogenic wide-QRS left bundle branch block (LBBB) produced by RV apical pacing results in an extreme degree of LV intraventricular dyssynchrony. Progressive deterioration of LV systolic function after RV apical pacing is a well-recognized phenomenon and has spurred the practice of pre-emptive biventricular pacing in patients with LV systolic dysfunction who are expected to be dependent on a substantial burden of paced beats. Quite remarkably, however, despite evidence of betterpreserved LV systolic function3 there have been relatively few efforts to substantiate the notion of less
Reprint requests: Prem Soman, MD, PhD, Division of Cardiology and The Heart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, A-429 Scaife Hall, 200 Lothrop Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15213; [email protected] J Nucl Cardiol 1071-3581/$34.00 Copyright Ó 2020 American Society of Nuclear Cardiology.
mechanical dyssynchrony with biventricular compared to RV pacing. Continuing efforts to optimize the physiology of cardiac pacing have resulted in proposals for RV septal pacing and His-bundle pacing.4,5 The latter approach, although theoretically the most physiological, is fraught with the technical challenges of lead stability and increasing pacing thresholds over time.6 More recently, left bundle branch (LBB) pacing has been proposed7 as an alternative to His-bundle pacing with the hope of overcoming some of these shortcomings with potential improved long-term stability and thresholds allowing maximal battery life. Unique downsides to LBB pacing are the possibility of septal perforation and potential coronary injury in addition to injury to the HisPurkinje system with repositioning, all of which need to be evaluated in larger studies. The use of radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging to measure LV synchrony is now well-established8. This approach leverages the partial volume effect, which results in a relatively linear relationsh
Data Loading...
