左束支起搏(LBBP)作为心脏再同步治疗(CRT)的疗效已有报道,但LBBP可能并不总是改善左心室(LV)的传导障碍。为了评估LBBP期间的LV电传导延迟,我们在2例尝试左束支优化心脏再同步治疗(LOT-CRT)的患者中,测量了从左束支起搏到LV导联传感(LBBP-LV)的传导时间.病例1是一名77岁女性,患有扩张型心肌病(DCM)和左束支传导阻滞。LBBP期间的QRS持续时间为160ms,刺激伪影与V6导联R波峰值(Stim-V6RWPT)之间的间隔为74ms。左心室中侧壁和左心室中后侧壁的LBBP-LV分别为112ms和102ms,分别。病例2是一名75岁女性,患有DCM和非特异性脑室内传导延迟。LBBP期间QRS持续时间为156ms,Stim-V6RWPT为66ms。左心室中前外侧壁LBBP-LV,低压中侧壁,左心室中-后外侧壁为96ms,107ms,和121毫秒,分别。总之,LV中外侧区的LBBP-LV相对较长。如果LBBP不能改善左心室传导紊乱,LOT-CRT可能更有效。
■已经报道了左束支起搏(LBBP)用于心脏再同步治疗(CRT)的疗效。然而,如果在LBBP期间从起搏到左心室(LV)侧区的传导时间较长,LBBP可能无法改善LV传导紊乱,导致无效的CRT。在这种情况下,在LBBP期间,在LV传导延迟区域植入LV导联的情况下,预计将有更有效的CRT.
The efficacy of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) as cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been reported, but LBBP may not always improve conduction disturbance in the left ventricle (LV). To evaluate LV electrical conduction delay during LBBP, we measured conduction time from the pacing at left bundle branch to LV lead sensing (LBBP-LV) in two patients in whom left bundle branch-optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy (LOT-CRT) was attempted. Case 1 was a 77-year-old female with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and left bundle branch block. The QRS duration during LBBP was 160 ms and the interval between the stimulus artifact and peak of the R wave in lead V6 (Stim-V6RWPT) was 74 ms. LBBP-LV at the LV mid-lateral wall and LV mid-posterolateral wall were 112 ms and 102 ms, respectively. Case 2 was a 75-year-old female with DCM and nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay. The QRS duration during LBBP was 156 ms and Stim-V6RWPT was 66 ms. LBBP-LV at the LV mid-anterolateral wall, LV mid-lateral wall, and LV mid-posterolateral wall were 96 ms, 107 ms, and 121 ms, respectively. In conclusion, LBBP-LV at the LV mid-lateral area was relatively long. If LBBP does not improve LV conduction disturbances, LOT-CRT may be more effective.
UNASSIGNED: The efficacy of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been reported. However, if the conduction time from pacing to the left ventricular (LV) lateral area during LBBP is long, LBBP may not improve LV conduction disturbance, resulting in ineffective CRT. In such cases, more effective CRT would be expected with LV lead implantation at the area of the LV conduction delay during LBBP.