Shmaila Saleem-Talib, Vincent J van Driel, Tanja Nikolic, Harry van Wessel, Hellen Louman, C Jan Willem Borleffs, Jeroen van der Heijden, Moniek Cox, Hemanth Ramanna
{"title":"The jugular approach for leadless pacing: A novel and safe alternative.","authors":"Shmaila Saleem-Talib, Vincent J van Driel, Tanja Nikolic, Harry van Wessel, Hellen Louman, C Jan Willem Borleffs, Jeroen van der Heijden, Moniek Cox, Hemanth Ramanna","doi":"10.1111/pace.14587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To evaluate safety of leadless pacemaker implantation through the internal jugular vein in a larger cohort with longer follow-up. Moreover, feasibility of non-apical pacing as well as relation between pacing site and QRS duration were assessed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eighty Two consecutive patients, who received a leadless pacemaker though the internal jugular vein, were included. Electrical parameters were measured at regular follow-up and any complications were registered. Paced QRS interval was compared for three pacing sites, RVOT, RV mid septum, and RV apical septum.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all patients, the leadless pacemaker was implanted successfully. In 69 patients, the device was implanted in a non-apical position. In 71% of cases, the device could be deployed at first attempt. The median fluoroscopy time was 4.4 min (range 0.9-51) The paced QRS interval was significantly narrower for non-apical pacing sites compared to apical pacing si 156 vs. 179 ms. p = .04, respectively. During mean follow-up of 16 months (range 0-43 months), electrical parameters remained stable. Two complications occurred, which could be resolved during the implant procedure. There were no access site related complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The jugular approach for leadless pacemaker implantation is feasible and may avoid vascular complications. It facilitates non-apical positioning of leadless pacemakers leading to a narrower paced QRS interval. The jugular approach allows for immediate post procedural ambulation.</p>","PeriodicalId":520740,"journal":{"name":"Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE","volume":" ","pages":"1248-1254"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.14587","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/9/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Aims: To evaluate safety of leadless pacemaker implantation through the internal jugular vein in a larger cohort with longer follow-up. Moreover, feasibility of non-apical pacing as well as relation between pacing site and QRS duration were assessed.
Methods: Eighty Two consecutive patients, who received a leadless pacemaker though the internal jugular vein, were included. Electrical parameters were measured at regular follow-up and any complications were registered. Paced QRS interval was compared for three pacing sites, RVOT, RV mid septum, and RV apical septum.
Results: In all patients, the leadless pacemaker was implanted successfully. In 69 patients, the device was implanted in a non-apical position. In 71% of cases, the device could be deployed at first attempt. The median fluoroscopy time was 4.4 min (range 0.9-51) The paced QRS interval was significantly narrower for non-apical pacing sites compared to apical pacing si 156 vs. 179 ms. p = .04, respectively. During mean follow-up of 16 months (range 0-43 months), electrical parameters remained stable. Two complications occurred, which could be resolved during the implant procedure. There were no access site related complications.
Conclusion: The jugular approach for leadless pacemaker implantation is feasible and may avoid vascular complications. It facilitates non-apical positioning of leadless pacemakers leading to a narrower paced QRS interval. The jugular approach allows for immediate post procedural ambulation.
目的:评价颈内静脉无铅起搏器植入术的安全性。评估非根尖起搏的可行性以及起搏位置与QRS持续时间的关系。方法:连续82例经颈内静脉置入无铅起搏器的患者。定期随访时测量电参数,并记录并发症。比较RVOT、RV中隔和RV根隔三个起搏部位的QRS间期。结果:所有患者均成功植入无导联起搏器。在69例患者中,该装置被植入非根尖位置。在71%的情况下,设备可以在第一次尝试时部署。中位透视时间为4.4分钟(范围0.9-51)。非根尖起搏部位的QRS间隔明显较根尖起搏部位短(156 vs 179 ms), p = 0.04。平均随访16个月(0 ~ 43个月),电参数保持稳定。发生了两个并发症,可在种植过程中解决。没有与手术部位相关的并发症。结论:颈静脉入路无铅起搏器植入术可行,可避免血管并发症。它有利于无导线起搏器的非根尖定位,导致更窄的QRS间隔。颈静脉入路允许手术后立即走动。