Trans-septal left ventricular endocardial lead in a patient with extensive anterior myocardial infarction and left ventricle (LV) apical endoventriculoplasty using a Vascutek patch-case report.
Arsalan Farhangee, Edward Davies, Guy Haywood, Katie Gaughan, Ion Mindrila
{"title":"Trans-septal left ventricular endocardial lead in a patient with extensive anterior myocardial infarction and left ventricle (LV) apical endoventriculoplasty using a Vascutek patch-case report.","authors":"Arsalan Farhangee, Edward Davies, Guy Haywood, Katie Gaughan, Ion Mindrila","doi":"10.21037/acr-23-109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantation has significantly improved quality of life and reduced overall mortality due to heart failure. The conventional method of CRT implantation is implanting a left ventricle (LV) lead into a side branch of the coronary sinus (CS) tributary to pace the epicardial surface and capture the LV. This is safe, and well tolerated with a high success rate. The rate of failure to place an LV lead has decreased over time, however, there are still challenging cases where a conventional CRT implant fails and alternative techniques are being considered, one such technique is trans-septal endocardial LV lead placement used to capture the LV, endocardially but its use is limited due to lack of evidence, practice uptake and clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Case description: </strong>We present, a case report of a patient for whom we successfully used a trans-septal left ventricle (TSLV) endocardial lead implantation approach following a failed LV lead implant via the CS to get effective cardiac resynchronisation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Post-TSLV lead implantation follow-up checks were normal with good electrical parameters and appropriate biventricular pacing. No post-procedural complications were reported, and echocardiographic parameters improved at follow-up. We believe, although, TSLV lead implant is more complex and often double operators are required, in selected patients, it can be a safe alternative following a failed traditional LV lead implant via the CS.</p>","PeriodicalId":29752,"journal":{"name":"AME Case Reports","volume":"8 ","pages":"106"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11459412/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AME Case Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/acr-23-109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantation has significantly improved quality of life and reduced overall mortality due to heart failure. The conventional method of CRT implantation is implanting a left ventricle (LV) lead into a side branch of the coronary sinus (CS) tributary to pace the epicardial surface and capture the LV. This is safe, and well tolerated with a high success rate. The rate of failure to place an LV lead has decreased over time, however, there are still challenging cases where a conventional CRT implant fails and alternative techniques are being considered, one such technique is trans-septal endocardial LV lead placement used to capture the LV, endocardially but its use is limited due to lack of evidence, practice uptake and clinical trials.
Case description: We present, a case report of a patient for whom we successfully used a trans-septal left ventricle (TSLV) endocardial lead implantation approach following a failed LV lead implant via the CS to get effective cardiac resynchronisation.
Conclusions: Post-TSLV lead implantation follow-up checks were normal with good electrical parameters and appropriate biventricular pacing. No post-procedural complications were reported, and echocardiographic parameters improved at follow-up. We believe, although, TSLV lead implant is more complex and often double operators are required, in selected patients, it can be a safe alternative following a failed traditional LV lead implant via the CS.