Heart rhythm · 2024
Global R-wave peak time for diagnosis of left bundle branch capture.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kiełbasa Grzegorz, Moskal Paweł, Bednarek Agnieszka, Jastrzębski Ignacy, Michel Patryk Stanisław, Rajzer Marek, Jastrzębski Marek
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: QRS axis deviation and rS configuration in V6 affect the ability of V6 R-wave peak time (RWPT) criterion to discriminate capture type during left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP).
OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that combining RWPTs from lateral leads: I, aVL, V5, and V6 may better reflect left ventricular activation time and that such a global RWPT may be insensitive to changes in QRS configuration.
METHODS: The analysis included 519 electrocardiograms (ECGs) with nonselective left bundle branch pacing (nsLBBP) and 176 ECGs with left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP). Optimal RWPT cutoffs and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) were determined for each lead and combinations of leads, to find the best RWPT criterion for discriminating nsLBBP from LVSP. Values were reported separately for healthy and diseased left conduction system groups.
RESULTS: The highest AUC of 97.1/89.2% was obtained for the global RWPT, which combined leads I and V6. The AUC for single-lead RWPT, was highest for lead I, followed by V6, V5, and aVL with AUC of 95.1/87.4%, 93.6/87.1%, 93.0/86.5%, and 84.8/74.6%, respectively. The global RWPT criterion was not affected by variations in QRS configuration, as V6 and I RWPTs often showed opposite responses to changes in axis. In contrast, all single-lead RWPT criteria were sensitive to axis deviation and QRS configuration. Diagnostically optimal RWPT cutoffs for global RWPT and lead I RWPT were 162.5/187.5 ms, and 81.5/90.5 ms, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The global RWPT criterion allows a more accurate diagnosis of LBBAP capture type independent of QRS configuration and axis.
OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that combining RWPTs from lateral leads: I, aVL, V5, and V6 may better reflect left ventricular activation time and that such a global RWPT may be insensitive to changes in QRS configuration.
METHODS: The analysis included 519 electrocardiograms (ECGs) with nonselective left bundle branch pacing (nsLBBP) and 176 ECGs with left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP). Optimal RWPT cutoffs and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) were determined for each lead and combinations of leads, to find the best RWPT criterion for discriminating nsLBBP from LVSP. Values were reported separately for healthy and diseased left conduction system groups.
RESULTS: The highest AUC of 97.1/89.2% was obtained for the global RWPT, which combined leads I and V6. The AUC for single-lead RWPT, was highest for lead I, followed by V6, V5, and aVL with AUC of 95.1/87.4%, 93.6/87.1%, 93.0/86.5%, and 84.8/74.6%, respectively. The global RWPT criterion was not affected by variations in QRS configuration, as V6 and I RWPTs often showed opposite responses to changes in axis. In contrast, all single-lead RWPT criteria were sensitive to axis deviation and QRS configuration. Diagnostically optimal RWPT cutoffs for global RWPT and lead I RWPT were 162.5/187.5 ms, and 81.5/90.5 ms, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The global RWPT criterion allows a more accurate diagnosis of LBBAP capture type independent of QRS configuration and axis.