ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) in patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block (LBBB), and to compare the clinical effects with traditional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). METHODS: Thirty-two patients with dilated cardiomyopathy complicated by cardiac insufficiency and left bundle branch block were divided into CRT group and LBBaP group. Parameters including pacing threshold, R-wave amplitude, pacing impedance and operation time, and X-ray exposure time were recorded. The left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), and left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD) were examined by echocardiography. The changes of QRS complex before and after operation were compared. RESULTS: Compared with CRT group, the LBBaP group spent less time on total operation time and X-ray exposure time and had stable electrode parameters including pacing threshold, R-wave amplitude, and lead impedance after 12-month follow-up. In addition, LBBaP can achieve narrow QRS complex (117.15 ± 9.91) ms immediately than that in CRT group (130.32 ± 12.41) ms. The change of QRS between LBBaP is (50.30 ± 23.79) ms and CRT group is (33.15 ± 20.22) ms. After 6 months' follow-up in LBBaP group, EF was higher than that before operation. Followed up for 12 months after operation, EF and LVEDD in LBBaP group were significantly improved compared with those before operation. CONCLUSION: Left bundle branch area pacing is a safe and effective resynchronization method for patients with cardiac insufficiency and asynchronization, which can achieve same clinical effects to CRT.
Subject(s)
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy , Heart Failure , Bundle-Branch Block/complications , Bundle-Branch Block/therapy , Electrocardiography , Heart Failure/complications , Heart Failure/therapy , Humans , Stroke Volume , Treatment Outcome , Ventricular Function, LeftABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) is accepted as a physiological form of pacing; however, it is complex and usually requires an expensive electrophysiological recording system. METHODS: A simplified approach ("9-partition method") was explored to perform LBBaP. In this method, a right anterior oblique 30° fluoroscopic image of the ventricle was divided into 9 sections ("3 × 3" partitions). From May 2018 to February 2019, we enrolled 51 consecutive patients who underwent pacemaker implantation. The patients were nonrandomly allocated to either the conventional LBBaP (c-LBBaP) group or simplified LBBaP (s-LBBaP) group. RESULTS: The mean age was 68.53 ± 11.90 years, and 32 (62.7%) patients were male. The overall success rate was 90.2% (46/51). Compared with the c-LBBaP group, the s-LBBaP group had a significantly lower total procedure duration (91.57 ± 19.51 minutes vs 70.68 ± 13.26 minutes; P < 0.001) and fluoroscopy duration (16.52 ± 5.34 minutes vs 10.54 ± 3.13 minutes; P < 0.001). The time from the 3830 lead and sheath passage through the tricuspid valve to an acceptable initial fixation site (4.69 ± 1.61 minutes vs 2.75 ± 1.04 minutes; P < 0.001) and the time to the left bundle branch lead being implanted successfully (11.78 ± 3.00 minutes vs 7.67 ± 2.45 minutes; P < 0.001) for the c-LBBaP vs s-LBBaP groups, respectively, were significantly different. After 3 months, there were no significant differences in the capture threshold, R wave amplitude, impedance, or QRS duration between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the c-LBBaP approach, our simplified 9-partition method was faster and did not require an expensive electrophysiological recording system.
Subject(s)
Atrioventricular Block/therapy , Cardiac Pacing, Artificial/methods , Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy/methods , Heart Failure/therapy , Aged , Atrioventricular Block/diagnosis , Atrioventricular Block/physiopathology , Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices , China/epidemiology , Female , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Humans , Male , Pacemaker, Artificial , Prosthesis Fitting , Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Retrospective Studies , Ventricular Septum , Work SimplificationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) is a new physiological pacing strategy that produces comparable clinical effects to His bundle pacing (HBP). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the immediate clinical outcomes of LBBaP vs RVP. METHODS AND RESULTS: From April 2018 to September 2018, we included 44 patients under continuous pacemaker implantation. Patients were randomly divided into the LBBaP group and conventional RVP group. Compared to the RVP group, the LBBaP group displayed significantly increased operative (90.10 ± 19.68 minutes vs 61.57 ± 6.62 minutes, P < .001) and X-ray exposure times (15.55 ± 5.62 minutes vs 4.67 ± 2.06 minutes, P < .001). The lead threshold of the LBBaP group was increased (0.68 ± 0.20 mV vs 0.51 ± 0.0 mV, P = .001), while the R-wave amplitude and ventricular impedance did not significantly differ between the two groups. The conventional RVP procedure significantly widened the QRS complex (93.62 ± 8.28 ms vs 135.19 ± 12.21 ms, P = .001), whereas the LBBaP had no effect on QRS complex (130.13 ± 43.30 ms vs 112.63 ± 12.14 ms, P = .904). Furthermore, the LBBaP procedure significantly narrowed the QRS complex in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) (168.43 ± 38.870 ms vs 119.86 ± 6.69 ms, P = .019). CONCLUSION: LBBaP is a new physiological, safe and effective pacing procedure with a high overall success rate. Compared to conventional RVP, LBBaP can correct LBBB, thereby improving cardiac electrical dyssynchrony.
