A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Permanent Left Bundle Branch Area DF-4 Defibrillator Lead Implantation-Feasibility, Procedural Caveats, Safety, and Follow-Up. | LitMetric

Permanent Left Bundle Branch Area DF-4 Defibrillator Lead Implantation-Feasibility, Procedural Caveats, Safety, and Follow-Up.

J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol

Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology and Pacing, Arrhythmia Heart Failure Academy, The Madras Medical Mission, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.

Published: March 2025


Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Introduction: Permanent implantation of a DF-4 implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) lead in the left bundle branch area (LBBA-ICD) is the next paradigm in amalgamating cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and defibrillation. We systematically investigated feasibility/success rate, procedural caveats, and complications associated with a permanent DF-4 LBBA ICD implant and pertinent data at short-term follow-up.

Methods: We prospectively attempted implantation of 7 Fr Durata (Abbott, Chicago, IL, USA) single coil DF-4 ICD lead at the LBBA using a fixed-curve non-deflectable CPS locator delivery sheath. Standard criteria defined LBBA capture. Relevant sensing/pacing, defibrillation, radiographic, and echocardiographic parameters testing were recorded at implant, discharge and 5-month follow-up.

Results: We enrolled 12 consecutive cardiac device-naïve patients (median age 67.5 years, male 91.7%, median LVEF 30%, median septal thickness 9 mm, median QRS duration 140 ms, class I CRT indication 58.3%, primary prevention ICD indication 75%). Minor complications (two transeptal perforations and one micro-dislodgment) were noted in 3/12 (25%) patients. Successful permanent LBBA ICD implant with adequate sensing/pacing was achieved in 9/12 (75%) subjects. Sustained ventricular fibrillation (VF) was inducible in 7/9 patients with successful implants with effective sensing and defibrillation in all. Follow-up device-related and echocardiographic parameters were similar at discharge and 5-month follow-up.

Conclusion: Permanent DF-4 LBBA ICD implant is feasible and successful in 75% of patients with an indication for ICD. With dedicated toolkits, higher volumes, and an obligate learning curve, the higher-than-expected frequency (25%) of minor complications may be ameliorated. Short-term data regarding lead and selected RV parameters remained favorable.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jce.16585DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

lbba icd
12
icd implant
12
left bundle
8
bundle branch
8
branch area
8
procedural caveats
8
icd lead
8
permanent df-4
8
df-4 lbba
8
echocardiographic parameters
8

Similar Publications