A method is presented for the non-invasive recording of His bundle electrical activity from the body surface in man. Several bipolar ECG leads were employed: precordial, Frank "x" and Frank "z". Signals were filtered (30-300 Hz), highly amplified (5 x 104) and averaged. Digital averaging was performed on line by a microcomputer (OTE Biomedica Neuroaverager mod. 1172). Surface investigation was performed in 10 patients affected by different conduction pathology simultaneously with HBE recordings for diagnostic purpose and in 5 normal volunteers only incruently. Highly repeatable electrical deflections (B waves) were recorded in the PR segment. In all patients a good correspondence between surface (B wave) and intracardiac (H wave) was found. Atrial pacing and pharmacological test were used in order to ascertain the real source of B wave.

Adult congenital heart disease patients may undergo numerous fluoroscopically guided procedures including pacemaker implantation during their lifetime. One alternative to traditional pacemaker setup which may improve long-term pacing outcomes is His bundle pacing. Given the altered His-bundle location, and given increased radiation exposure over a lifetime, we used 3-dimensional mapping to locate the His and to minimize fluoroscopy for placement of a His-bundle pacemaker system in a 31-year old patient with atrioventricular canal defect and complete heart block with 100% RV pacing and epicardial lead fracture.

No abstract available

This systematic review aimed to explore an association of new TR and its quantification in patients undergoing His bundle pacing (HBP).

Localisation of the conduction system under fluoroscopy is not easy and the ideal location of the pacing leads in physiological pacing is still being debated.

No abstract available

Invasive recording of His bundle signals (HBS) in electrophysiological study (EPS) is important in determining HV interval, the time taken to activate the ventricles from the His bundle. Noninvasive surface measurements of HBS are attempted by averaging typically 100-200 cardiac cycles of ECG time series in body surface potential mapping (BSPM) and in magnetocardiography (MCG) which records weak cardiac magnetic fields by highly sensitive detectors. However, noninvasive beat-by-beat extraction of HBS is challenged by ramp-like atrial signals and noise in PR segment of the cardiac cycle.

It is almost 100 years ago since Mahaim described the so-called paraspecific connections between the ventricular conduction axis and the crest of the muscular ventricular septum, believing such pathways to be ubiquitous. These pathways, however, have yet to be considered as potential pathways for septal activation during His bundle pacing.

Adoption and outcomes for conduction system pacing (CSP), which includes His bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), in real-world settings are incompletely understood. We sought to describe real-world adoption of CSP lead implantation and subsequent outcomes.

The comparative effects of different types of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) delivered by biventricular pacing (BVP), His bundle pacing (HBP), and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) remain inconclusive.

Physiological pacing has gained significant interest due to its potential to achieve optimal hemodynamic response. This study aimed to assess left ventricular performance in terms of electrical parameters, specifically QRS duration and mechanical performance, evaluated as myocardial work. We compared His Bundle Pacing (HBP) and Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing (LBBAP) to evaluate their effects.

This study evaluated the feasibility of His bundle pacing (HBP) in consecutive, unselected patients with advanced atrioventricular block (AVB) over a medium-term follow-up period, comparing procedural characteristics between nodal and infranodal sites of the conduction block.

His bundle pacing is a new method for delivering cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

Pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) is among the most common right ventricular pacing complications. Upgrading to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is the recommended treatment option. Conduction system pacing with His bundle pacing (HBP) has the potential to restore synchronous ventricular activation and can be an alternative to biventricular pacing (BVP). Patients with PICM scheduled for a system upgrade to CRT were included in the prospective cohort study. Either HBP or BVP was used for CRT. Electrocardiographic, clinical, and echocardiographic measurements were recorded at baseline and six-month follow-up. HBP was successful in 44 of 53 patients (83%). Thirty-nine patients with HBP and 22 with BVP completed a 6-month follow-up. HBP led to a higher reduction in QRS duration than BVP, 118.3 ± 14.20 ms vs. 150.5 ± 18.64 ms, p < 0.0001. The improvement in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class by one or two was more common in patients with HBP than those with BiV (p = 0.04). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improved in BVP patients from 32.9 ± 7.93% to 43.9 ± 8.07%, p < 0.0001, and in HBP patients from 34.9 ± 6.45% to 48.6 ± 7.73%, p < 0.0001. The improvement in LVEF was more considerable in HBP patients than in BVP patients, p = 0.019. The improvement in clinical outcomes and left ventricle reverse remodeling was more significant with HBP than BVP. HBP can be a valid alternative to BVP for upgrade procedures in PICM patients.

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a promising method for delivering cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), but its relative physiological effectiveness compared with His bundle pacing (HBP) is unknown. We conducted a within-patient comparison of HBP, LBBAP, and biventricular pacing (BVP).

HB pacing is a promising approach to achieve physiological pacing, but its efficacy and long-term effects require further validation. In current study, we deemed to investigate the effect of the His bundle pacing (HBP) lead location on pacing parameters.

Background Persistent atrial fibrillation may lead to a higher probability of inappropriate shocks in heart failure patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of His-Purkinje conduction system pacing combined with atrioventricular node ablation in improving heart function and preventing inappropriate shock therapy in these patients. Methods and Results A total of 86 consecutive patients with persistent atrial fibrillation and heart failure who had indications for ICD implantation were enrolled from January 2010 to March 2018. His-Purkinje conduction system pacing with ICD and atrioventricular node ablation was attempted in 55 patients, and the remaining patients underwent ICD implantation only. Left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction, LV end-systolic volume, New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification, shock therapies, and drug therapy were assessed during follow-up. Overall, 31 patients received ICD implantation with optimal drug therapy (group 1). atrioventricular node ablation combined with His-Purkinje conduction system pacing was successfully achieved in 52 patients (group 2). During follow-up, patients in group 2 had lower incidence of inappropriate shock (15.6% versus 0%, P<0.01) and adverse events (P=0.011). Meanwhile, improvement in LV ejection fraction and reduction in LV end-systolic volume were significantly higher in group 2 than in group 1 (15% versus 3%, P<0.001; and 40 versus 2 mL, P<0.01, respectively). NYHA functional class improved in both groups from a baseline 2.57±0.68 to 1.73±0.74 in group 1 and 2.73±0.59 to 1.42±0.53 in group 2 (P<0.01). Conclusions His-Purkinje conduction system pacing combined with atrioventricular node ablation is feasible and safe with a high success rate in persistent atrial fibrillation patients with heart failure and ICD indication. It can significantly reduce the incidence of inappropriate shocks and improve LV function.

Although His bundle pacing (HBP) has been shown to improve left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), its impact on mitral regurgitation (MR) remains uncertain.

Pace mapping and visual comparison of the local pacing response with the intrinsic QRS morphology form the mainstay of His bundle pacing (HBP). We evaluated the performance of a surface lead morphology match algorithm for automated classification of the pacing response in patients with narrow intrinsic QRS undergoing electroanatomic mapping (EAM)-guided HBP. HBP was attempted in 43 patients. In 28 cases with narrow QRS, the EnSite AutoMap Module was used for automated assessment of the QRS morphology resulting from pace mapping in the His cloud area with either a diagnostic catheter or the His lead. An intrinsic morphology match score (IMS) was calculated for 1.546 QRS complexes and assessed regarding its accuracy and performance in classifying the individual pacing response as either selective HBP (S-HBP), nonselective HBP (NS-HBP) or right ventricular stimulation. Automated morphology comparison of 354 intrinsic beats with the individual reference determined a test accuracy of 99% (95% CI 98.96-99.04) and a precision of 97.99-99.5%. For His-lead stimulation, an IMS ≥ 89% identified S-HBP with a sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) and a negative predictive value of 0.99 (0.98, 1.00). An IMS between 78 and < 89% indicated NS-HBP with a sensitivity and specificity of 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) and 0.99 (0.98, 1.00), respectively. IMS represents a new automated measure for standardized individual morphology classification in patients with normal QRS undergoing EAM-guided HBP.Clinical trial registration: NCT04416958.

We compared the effects of right ventricular (RVP; n = 26) and His bundle (HBP; n = 24) pacing in patients with atrioventricular conduction disorders and preserved LVEF. Postoperatively (1D), and after six months (6M), the patients underwent global longitudinal strain (GLS) and peak systolic dispersion (PSD) evaluation with 2D speckle-tracking echocardiography, assessment of left atrial volume index (LAVI) and QRS duration (QRSd), and sensing/pacing parameter testing. The RVP threshold was lower than the HBP threshold at 1D (0.65 ± 0.13 vs. 1.05 ± 0.20 V, p < 0.001), and then it remained stable, while the HBP threshold increased at 6M (1.05 ± 0.20 vs. 1.31 ± 0.30 V, p < 0.001). The RVP R-wave was higher than the HBP R-wave at 1D (11.52 ± 2.99 vs. 4.82 ± 1.41 mV, p < 0.001). The RVP R-wave also remained stable, while the HBP R-wave decreased at 6M (4.82 ± 1.41 vs. 4.50 ± 1.09 mV, p < 0.02). RVP QRSd was longer than HBP QRSd at 6M (145.0 ± 11.1 vs. 112.3 ± 9.3 ms, p < 0.001). The absolute value of RVP GLS decreased at 6M (16.32 ± 2.57 vs. 14.03 ± 3.78%, p < 0.001), and HBP GLS remained stable. Simultaneously, RVP PSD increased (72.53 ± 24.15 vs. 88.33 ± 30.51 ms, p < 0.001) and HBP PSD decreased (96.28 ± 33.99 vs. 84.95 ± 28.98 ms, p < 0.001) after 6 months. RVP LAVI increased (26.73 ± 5.7 vs. 28.40 ± 6.4 mL/m2, p < 0.05), while HBP LAVI decreased at 6M (30.03 ± 7.8 vs. 28.73 ± 8.7 mL/m2, p < 0.01). These results confirm that HBP does not disrupt ventricular synchrony and provides advantages over RVP.