Background: AVIM is a pacing algorithm incorporated into dual-chamber pacemakers to treat hypertension. AVIM delivers repeating sequences of short and longer atrioventricular delays leading to reduced preload and afterload. The therapy lowers blood pressure while simultaneously modulating the autonomic nervous system. The marked blood pressure reducing capability of AVIM has been already confirmed by a previous randomized clinical trial using conventional right ventricular (RV) pacing. Nevertheless, whether a similar blood pressure reduction could be also achieved by AVIM when conduction system pacing (CSP) is applied instead of RV pacing has not been investigated yet. Considering the facts that CSP using Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing (LBBAP) has been found to elicit more synchronous ventricular contraction and improved hemodynamics compared to RV pacing and AVIM is associated with a signficant burden of ventricular pacing, it is tempting to hypothesize that AVIM with CSP could be particularly beneficial. Purpose: To compare the effects of AVIM therapy when delivered via an LBBAP location with the effects when delivered using a traditional RV lead location. Methods: This single-center study evaluated subjects indicated for a dual chamber pacemaker who also had uncontrolled hypertension despite a stable dose of ³ 1 antihypertensive drug. Leads were placed in the RV or the LBBAP position. Subjects entered a run-in period of 4 weeks in which baseline office (oSBP)and 24-hour aSBP were measured. Subjects with baseline aSBP >130 mmHg and oSBP>140 mmHg at week 4 were included in the study. AVIM therapy was activated and a 24-hour aSBP was performed immediately after activation. Results: Using a dedicated CSP pacemaker lab setup, CSP was performed in 5 patients with the Select Secure electrode (model 3830-69 cm) delivered via a fixed curve sheath (C315HIS). During the run in phase, in 3 out of the 5 CSP-AVIM patients, high blood pressure did not reach the level of inclusion and therefore these patients were not used for further analysis. In the remaining two patients, AVIM was activated. These two patients had a V6 stimulus-peak time of 69 ms and 61 ms, while V1 stimulus peak time was: 121ms and 109ms respectively. The effect of AVIM on 24-hour aSBP in the activated CSP-AVIM patients was compared to the average effect seen in patients from the same center enrolled in the prior randomized study with leads in the RV. Table 1 shows individual aSBP values for the two patient groups. Results suggest that delivery of AVIM therapy through leads in either position generates a significant reduction in blood pressure: -24.1 mmHg vs. -15.4 mmHg when the lead is placed in LBBAP or RV positions respectively. Conclusion These results demonstrate a significant reduction in aSBP in both lead locations. Additional studies evaluating larger sample sizes are required to assess if specific lead positions are preferable.Table 1

Background: To preserve the benefit of atrial sensing without the implantation of an additional lead, a single-lead ICD system with a floating atrial dipole (VDD or DX ICD) has been developed. Purpose: The purpose of this nationwide survey was to provide an overview of the current key influences of device selection focusing on DX ICD systems and to test the applicability of a previously published decision-making flowchart of ICD type selection in the daily clinical practice. Methods: An online questionnaire was sent to all implanting centers in Hungary. In total, 10 centers participated in the survey and reported data from 361 DX ICD and 10 CRT-DX systems implantations between February 2021 and May 2023. Results: The most important influencing clinical factors indicated by the participating doctors were elevated risk of atrial fibrillation/stroke (56%), risk of sinus/supraventricular tachycardias (42%), and a potential need for CRT upgrade in the future (36%). The DX ICD was considered in the majority of cases instead of the VVI system (87%), and only in a small proportion instead of a DDD ICD (13%). 60% of the patients with DX ICDs were also included into remote monitoring-based follow-up. In 83% of the cases, good (>2 mV) or excellent (>5) atrial signal amplitude was recorded within 6 weeks after the implantation. Results: In the current nationwide survey, the most important influencing clinical factors indicated by the responding doctors for selecting a DX ICD were the elevated risk of stroke or sinus/supraventricular tachycardias and a potential need for CRT upgrade in the future. These findings support the use of a previously published decision-making flowchart.Graphical abstract