10.6084/m9.figshare.5720632.v1 Ana Paula Susin Osório Ana Paula Susin Osório Stefan Warpechowski Neto Stefan Warpechowski Neto Antonio Lessa Gaudie Ley Antonio Lessa Gaudie Ley Marcelo Haertel Miglioranza Marcelo Haertel Miglioranza Laura Lessa Gaudie Ley Laura Lessa Gaudie Ley Eduardo Dytz Almeida Eduardo Dytz Almeida Roberto Tofani Sant'anna Roberto Tofani Sant'anna Tiago Luiz Luz Leiria Tiago Luiz Luz Leiria Analysis of Dyssynchrony and Ventricular Function in Right Univentricular Stimulation at Different Positions SciELO journals 2017 Pacemaker, Artificial Ventricular Dysfunction Heart Failure Stroke Volume 2017-12-20 03:08:53 Dataset https://scielo.figshare.com/articles/dataset/Analysis_of_Dyssynchrony_and_Ventricular_Function_in_Right_Univentricular_Stimulation_at_Different_Positions/5720632 <div><p>Abstract Introduction: Chronic stimulation of the right ventricle with pacemaker is associated with ventricular dyssynchrony and loss of contractility, even in subjects without previous dysfunction. In these patients, there is a debate of which pacing site is less associated with loss of ventricular function. Objective: To compare pacemaker-induced dyssynchrony among different pacing sites in right ventricular stimulation. Methods: Cross-sectional study of outpatients with right ventricle stimulation higher than 80% and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. Pacing lead position (apical, medial septum or free wall) was assessed through chest X-rays. Every patient underwent echocardiogram to evaluate for dyssynchrony according to CARE-HF criteria: aortic pre-ejection time, interventricular delay and septum/posterior wall delay on M mode. Results: Forty patients were included. Fifty-two percent had apical electrode position, 42% mid septum and 6% free wall. Mean QRS time 148.97±15.52 milliseconds. A weak correlation between the mean QRS width and pre-aortic ejection time (r=0.32; P=0.04) was found. No difference in QRS width among the positions could be noted. Intraventricular delay was lower in apical patients against mid septal (34.4±17.2 vs. 54.3±19.1 P<0.05) - no difference with those electrode on the free wall. No difference was noted in the pre-aortic ejection time (P=0.9). Conclusion: Apical pacing showed a lower interventricular conduction delay when compared to medial septum site. Our findings suggest that apical pacing dyssynchrony is not ubiquitous, as previously thought, and that it should remain an option for lead placement.</p></div>