{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02744148506860371, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0016142050040355124, 'mean_word_length': 5.231155778894473, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Monitoring biventricular pacing parameters depending on the left ventricle lead configuration.

OBJECTIVES
To evaluate whether pacing or sensing configuration has an effect on pacing parameters or their time progression. Three left ventricular (LV) pacing parameters were monitored - the LV pacing threshold, pacing impedance and intrinsic R-wave amplitude.


METHODS
DATA WERE COLLECTED AT THREE INTERVALS: during implantation; between the second and fifth month after implantation (first follow-up); and between the eighth and 15th month after implantation (second follow-up). Repeated-measures ANOVA was used for the statistical analysis.


RESULTS
The impedance, but not its time progression, was significantly higher for the LV tip to LV ring configuration than for other configurations. R-wave amplitude and impedance increased significantly (without dependance on configurations) between implantation and first follow-up, as expected. The time progression of any parameter was not dependent on configuration of the LV lead.


CONCLUSIONS
LV tip to LV ring is the best configuration for maintaining a high impedance level. It is better to maintain an individual approach for pacing threshold and R-wave amplitude, and their settings.