Computed tomography validated right ventricular mid-septal lead implantation using right ventricular angiography

J Arrhythm. 2021 Jul 11;37(5):1131-1138. doi: 10.1002/joa3.12591. eCollection 2021 Oct.

Abstract

Background: Right ventricular (RV) mid-septal pacing has been proposed as an alternative to RV apical pacing. Fluoroscopic and electrocardiogram criteria are unreliable for predicting the RV mid-septal lead position. This study aimed to define the optimal RV mid-septal pacing site using RV angiography.

Methods: We randomized patients undergoing pacemaker implantation (PPM) to the RV angiography-guided group (Group A) or conventional fluoroscopy-guided group (Group F). In Group A, we performed an angiogram in right anterior oblique (RAO 30°), left anterior oblique (LAO 40°), and left lateral (LL) views. We made a 5-segment grid in RAO 30° and LL views and a 3-segment grid in LAO 40° on the angiographic silhouette to define the lead position. Computed tomography (CT) was used to validate the lead tip position in both groups.

Results: We enrolled 53 patients (Group A: 26, Group F: 27) with a mean age of 55.9 ± 12.2 years. CT images validated the lead position in the mid-septum (Group A, 23 [88.5%]; Group F, 11 [40.7%], P = .0003) and anteroseptal (Group A, 3 [11.5%]; Group F, 5 [18.5%], P = .24). In Group F, the lead was in the anterior wall in 9 patients (33.3%) and the right ventricular outflow tract in 2 (7.4%) patients and none in these two positions in Group A. The lead tip in segment one on the angiographic 5-segment grid in RAO 30° and LL views indicated a mid-septal lead position on CT.

Conclusions: RV angiography is safe and may be used to confirm the mid-septal lead position during PPM.

Keywords: alternate site pacing; cardiac pacing; mid‐septal pacing; pacemaker implantation septal pacing.