BACKGROUND:There is limited real-world experience of the learning curve for ultrasound (US) guided axillary venous access for cardiac device implantation, and it is usually performed before cutaneous incision. We investigated the learning curve, radiation exposure, safety, and efficacy of US-guided venous access in standard workflow. METHODS:US-guided access was performed by an experienced electrophysiologist with no prior application of the technique by using a standard vascular US probe and minimal modification to workflow. The learning curve was evaluated using access time (needle-to-wire time). Complications were recorded until hospital discharge, and efficacy was defined by procedural success. Radiation dose savings were estimated based on fluoroscopy time for access, and a control group underwent conventional fluoroscopy landmark-guided access (n = 44 punctures). RESULTS:147 US-guided punctures were performed in 74 patients for one (8%), two (71%), or three (17%) leads, or upgrades (4%). Access was successful in 97% (n = 72). There were no access-related peri-procedural complications. First US-guided access time was 30 seconds (interquartile range [IQR]: 17,60), and was similar to fluoroscopy-guided access time (43 seconds, IQR: 24,58; p = 0.45). Access time stabilized after 45 procedures, decreasing from 81 (IQR: 61,90) to 16 seconds (IQR: 10,20) from the first to the last 15 procedures (p < 0.001). 96% (n = 69) did not require fluoroscopy. 4% (n = 3) required 1 second fluoroscopy to confirm wire position after difficult passage. Estimated radiation exposure saving from controls was 30 seconds (IQR: 15,78) of fluoroscopy, resulting in 0.4 (IQR: 0.26,1.7) mGy cumulative skin dose, equivalent to 1.3 (95% confidence interval: 0.26,1.45) patient chest radiograph radiation exposure. CONCLUSION:US-guided axillary venous access for cardiac device implantation is feasible in a standard workflow and reduces radiation exposure. The learning curve time is acceptable, and the procedure is safe, even during training.

BACKGROUND There is a paucity of data comparing vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) at the time of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) surgery. Furthermore, the best management of DOACs (interruption vs continuation) is yet to be determined. OBJECTIVES This study aimed to compare the incidence of device -related bleeds and thrombotic events based on anticoagulant type (DOAC vs VKA) and regimen (interrupted vs uninterrupted). METHODS This was an observational multicenter study. We included patients on chronic oral anticoagulation undergoing CIED surgery. Patients were matched using propensity scoring. RESULTS We included 1,975 patients (age 73.8 +/- 12.4 years). Among 1,326 patients on DOAC, this was interrupted presurgery in 78.2% (n =1,039) and continued in 21.8% (n = 287). There were 649 patients on continued VKA. The matched population included 861 patients. The rate of any major bleeding was higher with continued DOAC (5.2%) compared to interrupted DOAC (1.7%) and continued VKA (2.1%) (P = 0.03). The rate of perioperative thromboembolism was 1.4% with interrupted DOAC, whereas no thromboembolic events occurred with DOAC or VKA continuation (P = 0.04). The use of dual antiplatelet therapy, DOAC continuation, and male sex were independent predictors of major bleeding on a multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS In this large real -world cohort, a continued DOAC strategy was associated with a higher bleeding risk compared to DOAC interruption or VKA continuation in patients undergoing CIED surgery. However, DOAC interruption was associated with increased thromboembolic risk. Concomitant dual antiplatelet therapy should be avoided whenever clinically possible. A bespoke approach is necessary, with a strategy of minimal DOAC interruption likely to represent the best compromise. (J Am Coll Cardiol EP 2024;10:121-132) (c) 2024 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Heart rhythm management is a continuously evolving sub-speciality of cardiology. Every year, many physicians and allied professionals (APs) start and complete their training in cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) or electrophysiology (EP) across the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) member countries. While this training ideally ends with an EHRA certification, the description of the learning pathway (what, how, when, and where) through an EHRA core curriculum is also a prerequisite for a successful training. The first EHRA core curriculum for physicians was published in 2009. Due to the huge developments in the field of EP and device therapy, this document needed updating. In addition, a certification process for APs has been introduced, as well as a recertification process and accreditation of EHRA recognized training centres. Learning pathways are more individualized now, with Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) to monitor learning progression of trainees. The 2024 updated EHRA core curriculum for physicians and APs describes, for both CIED and EP, the syllabus, OSATS, training programme and certification, and recertification for physicians and APs and stresses the importance of continued medical education after certification. In addition, requirements for accreditation of training centres and trainers are given. Finally, suggested reading lists for CIED and EP are attached as online supplements.

AimsThe randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled HOPE-HF trial assessed the benefit of atrio-ventricular (AV) delay optimization delivered using His bundle pacing. It recruited patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <= 40%, PR interval >= 200 ms, and baseline QRS <= 140 ms or right bundle branch block. Overall, there was no significant increase in peak oxygen uptake (VO2max) but there was significant improvement in heart failure specific quality of life. In this pre-specified secondary analysis, we evaluated the impact of baseline PR interval, echocardiographic E-A fusion, and the magnitude of acute high-precision haemodynamic response to pacing, on outcomes.Methods and resultsAll 167 randomized participants underwent measurement of PR interval, acute haemodynamic response at optimized AV delay, and assessment of presence of E-A fusion. We tested the impact of these baseline parameters using a Bayesian ordinal model on VO2max, quality of life and activity measures. There was strong evidence of a beneficial interaction between the baseline acute haemodynamic response and the blinded benefit of pacing for VO2 (Pr 99.9%), Minnesota Living With Heart Failure (MLWHF) (Pr 99.8%), MLWHF physical limitation score (Pr 98.9%), EQ-5D visual analogue scale (Pr 99.6%), and exercise time (Pr 99.4%). The baseline PR interval and the presence of baseline E-A fusion did not have this reliable ability to predict the clinical benefit of pacing over placebo across multiple endpoints.ConclusionsIn the HOPE-HF trial, the acute haemodynamic response to pacing reliably identified patients who obtained clinical benefit. Patients with a long PR interval (>= 200 ms) and left ventricular impairment who obtained acute haemodynamic improvement with AV-optimized His bundle pacing were likely to obtain clinical benefit, consistent across multiple endpoints. Importantly, this gradation can be reliably tested for before randomization, but does require high-precision AV-optimized haemodynamic assessment to be performed. In the HOPE HF RCT only the magnitude of acute haemodynamic response predicted outcomes. Neither EA fusion nor the extent of PR prolongation predicted longer term response. BP, blood pressure; CrI, credible interval; LV, left ventricular; MVO2, peak oxygen consumption; OR, odds ratio; QOL, quality of life; RBBB, right bundle branch block. image

In ambulatory patients with complete heart block (CHB), dual-chamber (DDD) pacing confers physiological benefits versus single-chamber (VVI) pacing, however, the impact on mortality is disputed. Nonagenarians constitute an expanding proportion of pacemaker recipients, yet data on device selection and outcomes are limited, especially in emergency situations. In nonagenarians with emergent CHB, we compared the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients receiving VVI versus DDD pacemakers. Cox proportional-hazards analysis examined all-cause mortality and death from congestive cardiac failure (CCF). There were 168 consecutive patients followed-up for 30.6 ± 15.5 months. Of these, 22 patients (13.1%) received VVI pacemakers; when compared with DDD recipients, these patients had similar median age (93 vs. 91 years, p=0.15) and left ventricular (LV) systolic function (LV ejection fraction [EF] 49.2% ± 9.7 vs. 50.7% ± 10.1, p=0.71), but were more frail (Rockwood scale 5.2 ± 1.8 vs. 4.3 ± 1.1, p=0.004) and more likely to have dementia (27.3% vs. 8.9%, p=0.011). Post-implant, device interrogation demonstrated that VVI recipients had higher respiratory rates (21.3 ± 2.4 vs. 17.5 ± 2.6 breaths per minute, p=0.002), lower mean heart rates (65.5 ± 10.1 vs. 71.9 ± 8.6 bpm, p=0.002), and lower daily activity levels (0.57 ± 0.3 vs. 1.5 ± 1.1 hours of activity, p=0.016) than DDD recipients. Adjusting for age, frailty and dementia, VVI pacing was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08 to 4.1, p=0.03) and death from CCF (adjusted HR 7.1, 95%CI 2.5 to 20.6, p<0.001). In conclusion, in nonagenarians with emergent CHB, dual-chamber pacing was associated with improved symptomatic and prognostic outcomes versus singlechamber pacing.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial envelopes reduce the incidence of cardiac implantable electronic device infections, but their cost restricts routine use in the United Kingdom. Risk scoring could help to identify which patients would most benefit from this technology. METHODS: A novel risk score (BLISTER [Blood results, Long procedure time, Immunosuppressed, Sixty years old (or younger), Type of procedure, Early re-intervention, Repeat procedure]) was derived from multivariate analysis of factors associated with cardiac implantable electronic device infection. Diagnostic utility was assessed against the existing PADIT score (Prior procedure, Age, Depressed renal function, Immunocompromised, Type of procedure) in both standard and high-risk external validation cohorts, and cost-utility models examined different BLISTER and PADIT score thresholds for TYRX (Medtronic; Minneapolis, MN) antimicrobial envelope allocation. RESULTS: In a derivation cohort (n=7383), cardiac implantable electronic device infection occurred in 59 individuals within 12 months of a procedure (event rate, 0.8%). In addition to the PADIT score constituents, lead extraction (hazard ratio, 3.3 [95% CI, 1.9-6.1]; P<0.0001), C-reactive protein >50 mg/L (hazard ratio, 3.0 [95% CI, 1.4-6.4]; P=0.005), reintervention within 2 years (hazard ratio, 10.1 [95% CI, 5.6-17.9]; P<0.0001), and top-quartile procedure duration (hazard ratio, 2.6 [95% CI, 1.6-4.1]; P=0.001) were independent predictors of infection. The BLISTER score demonstrated superior discriminative performance versus PADIT in the standard risk (n=2854, event rate: 0.8%, area under the curve, 0.82 versus 0.71; P=0.001) and high-risk validation cohorts (n=1961, event rate: 2.0%, area under the curve, 0.77 versus 0.69; P=0.001), and in all patients (n=12 198, event rate: 1%, area under the curve, 0.8 versus 0.75, P=0.002). In decision-analytic modeling, the optimum scenario assigned antimicrobial envelopes to patients with BLISTER scores >= 6 (10.8%), delivering a significant reduction in infections (relative risk reduction, 30%; P=0.036) within the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-utility thresholds (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, pound 18 446). CONCLUSIONS: The BLISTER score (https://qxmd.com/calculate/calculator_876/the-blister-score-for-cied-infection) was a valid predictor of cardiac implantable electronic device infection, and could facilitate cost-effective antimicrobial envelope allocation to high-risk patients.

Downgrading implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) is becoming a common clinical scenario in an aging population with increased comorbidities and more widespread use of do-not-resuscitate orders. Therefore, more patients have had ICD therapies deactivated. However, when devices require replacement, it is unnecessary to implant a larger, more expensive defibrillator to keep therapies turned off. We describe a potential solution for patients using current technology.

BACKGROUND:There is a paucity of data comparing vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) at the time of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) surgery. Furthermore, the best management of DOACs (interruption vs continuation) is yet to be determined. OBJECTIVES:This study aimed to compare the incidence of device-related bleeds and thrombotic events based on anticoagulant type (DOAC vs VKA) and regimen (interrupted vs uninterrupted). METHODS:This was an observational multicenter study. We included patients on chronic oral anticoagulation undergoing CIED surgery. Patients were matched using propensity scoring. RESULTS:We included 1,975 patients (age 73.8 ± 12.4 years). Among 1,326 patients on DOAC, this was interrupted presurgery in 78.2% (n = 1,039) and continued in 21.8% (n = 287). There were 649 patients on continued VKA. The matched population included 861 patients. The rate of any major bleeding was higher with continued DOAC (5.2%) compared to interrupted DOAC (1.7%) and continued VKA (2.1%) (P = 0.03). The rate of perioperative thromboembolism was 1.4% with interrupted DOAC, whereas no thromboembolic events occurred with DOAC or VKA continuation (P = 0.04). The use of dual antiplatelet therapy, DOAC continuation, and male sex were independent predictors of major bleeding on a multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS:In this large real-world cohort, a continued DOAC strategy was associated with a higher bleeding risk compared to DOAC interruption or VKA continuation in patients undergoing CIED surgery. However, DOAC interruption was associated with increased thromboembolic risk. Concomitant dual antiplatelet therapy should be avoided whenever clinically possible. A bespoke approach is necessary, with a strategy of minimal DOAC interruption likely to represent the best compromise.

Effective rate-adaptive pacing may be difficult in the presence of atrial fibrillation (AF), and is important during high-intensity exercise. This case presents a 74-year-old elite cyclist with AF and a biventricular pacemaker after atrioventricular (AV) node ablation. He reported sudden breathlessness due to heart rate drops, caused by breaching the artefact threshold on the minute-ventilation sensor. He was exchanged to a generator with an impedance-derived contractility sensor (closed-loop stimulation), resulting in resolution of symptoms, and no further rate drops. This is the first description of the utility of closed-loop stimulation in high-intensity exercise.

AIMS:Excessive prolongation of PR interval impairs coupling of atrio-ventricular (AV) contraction, which reduces left ventricular pre-load and stroke volume, and worsens symptoms. His bundle pacing allows AV delay shortening while maintaining normal ventricular activation. HOPE-HF evaluated whether AV optimized His pacing is preferable to no-pacing, in a double-blind cross-over fashion, in patients with heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40%, PR interval ≥200 ms and either QRS ≤140 ms or right bundle branch block. METHODS AND RESULTS:Patients had atrial and His bundle leads implanted (and an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead if clinically indicated) and were randomized to 6 months of pacing and 6 months of no-pacing utilizing a cross-over design. The primary outcome was peak oxygen uptake during symptom-limited exercise. Quality of life, LVEF and patients' holistic symptomatic preference between arms were secondary outcomes. Overall, 167 patients were randomized: 90% men, 69 ± 10 years, QRS duration 124 ± 26 ms, PR interval 249 ± 59 ms, LVEF 33 ± 9%. Neither peak oxygen uptake (+0.25 ml/kg/min, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.23 to +0.73, p = 0.3) nor LVEF (+0.5%, 95% CI -0.7 to 1.6, p = 0.4) changed with pacing but Minnesota Living with Heart Failure quality of life improved significantly (-3.7, 95% CI -7.1 to -0.3, p = 0.03). Seventy-six percent of patients preferred His bundle pacing-on and 24% pacing-off (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION:His bundle pacing did not increase peak oxygen uptake but, under double-blind conditions, significantly improved quality of life and was symptomatically preferred by the clear majority of patients. Ventricular pacing delivered via the His bundle did not adversely impact ventricular function during the 6 months.

BACKGROUND:Remote monitoring (RM) of implantable cardiac devices provides substantial and complex information, presenting new challenges such as detection of a patient's death. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to describe RM transmissions indicating death and propose a management strategy for services. METHODS:The study included consecutive ambulatory outpatients whose deaths were detected via RM. Clinical and device data were collected from electronic records, and ethical approval was obtained from the service's institutional review board. RESULTS:Over a 9-year period (2014-2023), 28 patients were detected. The deceased patients had implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, pacemakers, and implantable loop recorders. In 54% of the cases, the patient's death had already been recognized. Alert transmissions indicating death were commonly related to ventricular arrhythmia events, but also due to lead measurements, and implantable loop recorder battery status. Several diagnostic features may indicate a patient's death. The most reliable was the presenting electrogram, demonstrating base rate pacing with no capture. Device diagnostics, lead parameters, and arrhythmia recordings may indicate death; however, not all cases present with recordings and diagnosis may not be conclusive. A majority (82%) had ventricular arrhythmia at the time of death. In cases where defibrillator shocks were delivered, the arrhythmia reinitiated shortly after successful cardioversion. Delayed therapy was observed, and some patients did not receive defibrillator shocks because of discriminators or because the arrhythmia rate fell below the shock zone. CONCLUSION:Detecting a patient death via RM presents unique challenges and considerations for services. Standard operational policies and legal consultation should be established to address the implications.

Abstract Background The incidence of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections is rising. Purpose We examined the factors associated with CIED infection, assessed the prognostic power of the PADIT risk score, and modelled the cost-utility of selective TYRX antimicrobial envelope use for preventing CIED infections. Methods Data were extracted from 2016 to 2019, and included all de novo implants, generator changes and lead interventions for transvenous CIEDs at a high-volume UK centre. CIED infection was defined as hospitalisation for device infection within 12 months of a procedure. Cost-utility analysis was informed by standardised tariffs, and quality adjusted life year (QALY) and efficacy data was extrapolated from analysis of the WRAP-IT trial. Results 6,035 patients underwent 7,383 procedures; CIED infection occurred in 59 individuals (0.8%). In addition to the constituents of the PADIT score, lead extraction (HR 3.3 (1.9–6.1), p<0.0001), C-reactive protein >50mg/l (HR 3.0 (1.4–6.4), p=0.005), re-intervention within two years (HR 10.1 (5.6–17.9), p<0.0001), and procedure duration over two hours (HR 2.6 (1.6–4.1), p=0.001) were independent predictors of infection. Increased PADIT score was strongly associated with infection (AUC: 0.82, HR per point increase: 1.36 (1.27–1.47), p<0.0001). A cost-utility model assigning TYRX envelopes to patients with PADIT scores ≥6 predicted a reduction in infections (number needed to treat: 72) and a cost per QALY gained within the UK's (NICE) cost-effectiveness threshold (£25,107). Conclusions The PADIT score was a powerful predictor of CIED infections in a heterogeneous population,and may facilitate cost-effective TYRX envelope allocation in selected high-risk patients. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

The SICD has been increasingly used with its addition to the HRS guidelines in 2017. A question mark remains around the burden of inappropriate therapy (IT), which, in PRETORIAN had an IT in 9.6% of patients over 4 years. Importantly, this trial was conducted using devices without the SMART pass (SP) algorithm installed. SP (Boston Scientific Corporation, Natick, MA) is a bandpass filter has been shown to reduce inappropriate therapy. However, a key area under-investigated is the algorithms' ability to deactivate itself in community.

Abstract Background In ambulatory patients with complete heart block and preserved sinus node activity (CHBs), dual chamber pacing confers well-established physiological benefits versus single chamber pacing. There is limited evidence as to whether these benefits extend to very frail patients, especially those over 90 years of age. Purpose In nonagenarians presenting with emergent CHBs from 2016–2019, we compared the clinical characteristics of patients selected for single versus dual chamber pacemakers (PPM), and evaluated the symptomatic and prognostic implications of these devices. Methods Baseline characteristics were discerned from electronic records, and physiological data extracted from serial PPM interrogations. Frailty was quantified according to the Rockwood clinical frailty scale (1–9). Cause of death was provided by the patients' General Practitioner. Cox proportional hazards analysis (HR, 95% CI) examined associations with all-cause mortality and death from congestive cardiac failure (CCF). Results 168 consecutive patients were included (44.3% Male, Median age: 91 (2) years) and followed-up for 26.9±14.6 months. 22 patients (13.1%) were implanted with single chamber pacemakers (all programmed VVIR); when compared with patients receiving dual chamber devices, these patients had similar median age (93 (3) versus 91 (2) years, p=0.15) and LV systolic function (LVEF: 49.2% ±9.7 versus 50.7% ±10.1, p=0.71), but were more frail (Rockwood scale: 5.2±1.8 versus 4.3±1.1, p=0.004) and more likely to have severe cognitive impairment (27.3% versus 9.2%, p=0.018). Post implant, patients who received single chamber devices had higher average respiratory rates (21.3±2.4 breaths per minute versus 17.5±2.6 breaths per minute, p=0.002), lower average heart rates (65.5±10.1 bpm versus 71.9±8.6 bpm, p=0.002), and lower daily activity levels (0.57±0.3 hours of activity versus 1.5±1.1 hours of activity, p=0.016) than those with dual chamber devices. Death from CCF was more common in patients receiving single chamber devices (40.9% versus 6.2%, log rank p<0.0001); this association persisted when adjusting for age, frailty and cognitive impairment (adjusted HR: 6.2 (2.2–17.3, p=0.0005). However, in this age group, single chamber pacing was not independently associated with all-cause mortality when compared with dual chamber pacing (adjusted HR: 1.9 (0.95–3.6, p=0.07). Conclusions In nonagenarians with CHBs, dual chamber pacing was associated with improved symptomatic outcomes and a reduced risk of death from CCF, but did not affect all-cause mortality when compared with single chamber pacing. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

Risk of infection is an important consideration for patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures. We examined the comparative incidence and associations of device infection for patients undergoing either de novo CIED implant or device re-intervention. Data were extracted from a high-volume UK centre from 2016-2019. Patient demographics, procedural parameters and outcomes were examined according to two groups: ‘De novo implants’ (all transvenous CIED implants) and ‘Re-interventions’ (generator replacement or revision, new lead insertion without extraction, and lead extraction). Patients undergoing re-intervention for device infection were excluded. During follow-up, a device infection was defined as a clinical diagnosis of pocket or systemic infection requiring intervention within 90 days of the index procedure. 7,384 procedures were included. There were 4,837 de novo implants (61.2% dual chamber, 22.5% single chamber, 16.1% biventricular devices) and 2,547 re-interventions (53.4% generator replacement, 27.9% new lead, 16.6% lead extraction). All patients received a pre-procedural bolus of two intravenous antibiotics. 43 device infections were recorded (0.58%). There was an exponential relationship between intervention number and infection incidence; de novo implant: 0.27%, 2nd intervention: 1.01%, 3rd (or greater) intervention: 3.3%. Adjusting for indication, type of re-intervention performed, device type, and patient co-morbidities (Age, Sex, LV function, ischaemic heart disease, cardiomyopathy, atrial fibrillation), intervention number was an independent predictor of device infection versus de novo implant (adjusted OR 4.6 (2.1-10), p<0.0001). The risk of infection from device re-intervention was significant, cumulative, and occurred independently of procedure type and patient parameters. This data should contribute to procedural decision-making, particularly for patients in whom the indication for re-intervention may be equivocal.

Remote monitoring (RM) in conjunction with regular face-to-face visits has been shown to be a safe and effective model of care to manage patients with implantable cardiac devices. This strategy is more commonly used in patients with high voltage devices. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, rapid deployment of RM for virtual review following all de-novo low voltage devices implants was implemented in our institution. There are limited data on the feasibility of RM rapid deployment in this population.

Nonagenarians are under-represented in clinical trials of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). In an emergency, the absence of test results or a complete medical history can challenge operator decision-making, particularly when permanent pacing is preferred.

Abstract Introduction His bundle pacing (HBP) aims to deliver physiological activation of the ventricles via the native His-Purkinje conduction system. A challenge of HBP is the limited market of implantation tools, pacing leads and specifically designed pacing algorithms. Purpose Over the last three years both Medtronic (MDT) and Boston Scientific (BSC) generators have been used for HBP in a large tertiary centre. We examined whether there was any difference between lead parameters and battery longevity depending on the type of manufacturer used. Methods Patients implanted with a MDT Select Secure model 3830 lead were included in this retrospective study. Data collected included HBP thresholds (analysed at 1ms pulse width) at implant and at the most recent device check, HBP percentages and battery longevity (months). Battery longevity were calculated by adding duration of follow up and estimated battery life at last follow up. Results A total of 31 patients were included for data analysis (58% male and mean age 72 years). 18 patients had MDT generators of which 3 were PPMs, 5 were CRT-Ps and 10 were CRT-Ds. 13 patients had BSC generators of which 5 were PPMs, 5 were CRT-Ps and 3 were CRT-Ds. Mean follow up of the cohort was 12.7±9.02 months. Mean HBP percentages were 77±37% and 72.2±42.1% for MDT and BSC, respectively (p=0.430). Mean HBP threshold (Volts) at implant was significantly lower with BSC vs MDT (0.85±0.58 vs 1.84±1.06, p=0.01), and similar after follow up (1.01±0.91 vs 1.32±0.73, p=NS). There were no statistically significant differences between mean HBP threshold at implant compared to follow up for both manufacturers. Interestingly, mean battery longevity for BSC vs MDT generators was significantly higher (136±29.3 vs 90.5±29.1, p<0.001). Longevity was also compared for PPM/CRT-P and CRT-D separately. For PPM/CRT-P, BSC generators had significantly higher longevity as compared to MDT (141.6±33.1 vs 91.6±34.5, p=0.009). This difference was not observed for CRT-Ds between the 2 manufacturers (p=0.068). Conclusion Our results suggest HBP with MDT Select Secure 3830 lead is feasible with BSC generators. There is potentially greater battery longevity with BSC compared to MDT generators. Further studies are needed with greater numbers and longer follow up to confirm this finding. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.