• Hanno Oswald, Stefan Asbach, Julia Köbe, Heinrich Weglage, Bernfried Schulte-Pitzke, and Johannes Brachmann.
• Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
• Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2015 Aug 1; 38 (8): 942-50.

BackgroundCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) relies on sufficient left ventricular (LV) pacing with safety margin to phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS). Previous studies introduced LV vector reprogramming in bipolar coronary sinus leads to optimize LV pacing and avoid PNS. We investigated the efficacy and reliability of quadripolar leads in CRT.MethodsThe EffaceQ study enrolled 344 patients with de novo CRT implantation with a quadripolar LV lead in an observational, prospective multicenter study. The study was powered to demonstrate that in at least 90% of patients with an implanted quadripolar LV lead, a viable LV pacing configuration (LVPC) is available (primary end point: LV pacing threshold ≤2.5 V/0.5 ms, sufficient PNS margin).ResultsQuadripolar leads were successfully implanted in 96% of patients. A total of 278 of 299 (93.0%) patients with complete data met the criteria for viable LVPC. With the use of traditional LVPCs, a viable LVPC would have been available (268 of 299 patients; P = 0.002) in significantly fewer patients (89.6%). In any LVPC, PNS was inducible in 65.0% of patients and 22.6% of patients reported PNS during ambulatory 3-month follow-up. LVPC reprogramming was performed in 49.8% of patients. PNS inducibility decreased from distal to proximal electrodes, whereas LV pacing thresholds increased from distal to proximal. At prehospital discharge, 5.9 ± 2.8 viable LVPCs were observed, stable during follow-up. The quadripolar electrode offered significantly more LVPC for LV optimization and PNS avoidance.ConclusionQuadripolar LV leads yield high numbers of patients with viable LVPCs and alternatives for noninvasive repositioning of LV pacing.© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

16 keywords...

hide…