Background: Detrimental effects of right ventricular (RV) apical pacing have directed the interest toward alternative pacing sites such as the RV mid-septum. As safety data are scarce for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) recipients the study aims to evaluate ICD lead performance in the mid-septal position.
Methods and results: A total of 299 ICD recipients (79% male, aged 65.2 ± 12.1 years, 83% primary prevention of sudden cardiac death) were randomized to receive the RV ICD electrode either in a mid-septal (n=145) or apical (n=154) location. Event-free survival was evaluated at 3 (primary endpoint) and 12 months (secondary endpoint). Events included a composite of lead revision, suboptimal right ventricular electrode performance (including defibrillation thresholds (DFT)>25 J) or lead position not in accordance with randomized location. Event-free survival at 3 (12) months was observed in 80.6% (72.3%) of patients randomized to a mid-septal and in 82.2% (72.1%) of patients randomized to an apical lead position, p=0.726 (p=0.969). Pre-defined margins for non-inferiority were not reached at 3 or 12 months. High DFT was found in 7 patients (5.0%) of the mid-septal and in 3 (2.2%) patients of the apical group (p=0.209).
Conclusion: In ICD recipients electrode positioning to the RV mid-septum or the RV apex results in slightly different rates concerning the survival free of lead revision, suboptimal right ventricular electrode performance or non-randomized lead position. Non-inferiority of the mid-septal lead location cannot be concluded. This should be taken into consideration when a mid-septal lead position is pursued.
Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00745745.
Keywords: Alternative pacing site; Defibrillation threshold; Implantable cardioverter defibrillator; Mid-septum; Safety.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.