Conduction system pacing improves the outcomes on patients with high percentage of ventricular pacing and heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction

被引:2
|
作者
Zhang, Duo-duo [1 ]
Zhao, Fu-lu [1 ]
Yang, Yi-heng [1 ]
Ma, Cheng-ming [1 ]
Ma, Pei-pei [1 ]
Zhao, Yan-ni [1 ]
Xia, Yun-long [1 ]
Gao, Lian-jun [1 ]
Dong, Ying-xue [1 ]
机构
[1] Dalian Med Univ, Dept Cardiol, Affiliated Hosp 1, Dalian, Peoples R China
来源
FRONTIERS IN CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE | 2023年 / 10卷
关键词
conduction system pacing; heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction; high percentage of ventricular pacing; his bundle pacing; left bundle branch pacing; CARDIAC RESYNCHRONIZATION THERAPY; STIMULATION; DYSFUNCTION; LESSONS; UPGRADE; PACE; TIME;
D O I
10.3389/fcvm.2023.1132520
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Aims: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of CSP in patients with a high percentage of ventricular pacing and heart failure with HFmrEF. Methods: Patients who underwent CSP for HFmrEF and ventricular pacing >40% were consecutively enrolled from January 2018 to May 2021. All participants were followed up at least 12 months. Clinical data including cardiac performance and lead outcomes were compared before and after the procedure. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was measured using the biplane Simpson's method. HFmrEF was defined as heart failure with the LVEF ranging from 41%-49%. Results: CSP was successfully performed in 64 cases (96.97%), which included 16 cases of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and 48 cases of His bundle pacing (HBP). After a mean of 23.128.17 months follow-up, NYHA classification (P<0.001), LVEF (42.45 +/- 1.84% vs. 49.97 +/- 3.57%, P<0.001) and left ventricular end diastolic diameter (LVEDD) (55.59 +/- 6.17mm vs. 51.66 +/- 3.48mm, P<0.001) improved significantly. During follow-up, more than half (39/64,60.9%) of patients returned to normal LVEF and LVEDD with complete reverse remodeling. The pacing threshold in LBBP was lower (0.90 +/- 0.27V@0.4ms vs. 1.61 +/- 0.71V@0.4ms, P<0.001) than that in HBP. No perforation, electrode dislodging, thrombosis or infection was observed during follow-up. Conclusions: CSP could improve the clinical outcomes in patients with HFmrEF and a high percentage of ventricular pacing. LBBP might be a better choice because of its feasibility and safety, especially in patients with infranodal atrioventricular block.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Conduction system pacing versus biventricular pacing in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and electrical dyssynchrony
    Ammar, Ahmed
    Elewa, Ahmed
    Emam, Amr Y.
    Sharief, Mohamed
    Kamel, Omnia
    FRONTIERS IN CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE, 2024, 11
  • [2] Conduction System Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction
    Karki, Saurab
    Lakra, Pallavi
    Kumar, Kaushik
    Rao, Shiavax J.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2025, 14 (03)
  • [3] Improved outcomes of conduction system pacing in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Gin, Julian
    Chow, Chee Loong
    Voskoboinik, Alex
    Nalliah, Chrishan
    Wong, Chiew
    Van Gaal, William
    Farouque, Omar
    Mohamed, Uwais
    Lim, Han S.
    Kalman, Jonathan M.
    Wong, Geoffrey R.
    HEART RHYTHM, 2023, 20 (08) : 1178 - 1187
  • [4] The feasibility and safety of his-purkinje conduction system pacing in patients with heart failure with severely reduced ejection fraction
    Ma, Chengming
    Wang, Zhongzhen
    Ma, Zhulin
    Ma, Peipei
    Dai, Shiyu
    Wang, Nan
    Yang, Yiheng
    Li, Guocao
    Gao, Lianjun
    Xia, Yunlong
    Xiao, Xianjie
    Dong, Yingxue
    FRONTIERS IN CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE, 2023, 10
  • [5] Conduction system pacing versus biventricular pacing in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Felix, Iuri Ferreira
    Collini, Michelle
    Fonseca, Rafaela
    Guida, Camila
    Armaganijan, Luciana
    Healey, Jeffrey Sean
    Carvalho, Guilherme
    HEART RHYTHM, 2024, 21 (06) : 881 - 889
  • [6] Correlation of ventricular pacing burden and left ventricular function in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction
    Scully, Timothy G.
    Kelsang, Tenzin
    Backhouse, Brendan
    Sajeev, Jithin K.
    Roberts, Louise
    Pathik, Bhupesh
    Teh, Andrew W.
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2024, 35 (02) : 301 - 306
  • [7] Clinical outcomes of conduction system pacing compared to biventricular pacing in patients with mid-range ejection fraction
    Tang, Jiaojiao
    Kong, Nathan W.
    Beaser, Andrew
    Aziz, Zaid
    Yeshwant, Srinath
    Ozcan, Cevher
    Tung, Roderick
    Upadhyay, Gaurav A.
    JOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL CARDIAC ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2025, 68 (01) : 111 - 116
  • [8] Is conduction system pacing more effective than right ventricular pacing in reducing atrial high-rate episodes in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction?
    Chen, Ying
    Ma, Zhu-Lin
    Liu, Fei
    Wang, Nan
    Ma, Yue-Yang
    Guan, Zi-An
    Zhe, Zhuang-Chuan
    Xia, Yun-Long
    Dong, Ying-Xue
    FRONTIERS IN PHYSIOLOGY, 2024, 15
  • [9] Early left bundle branch pacing in heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction and left bundle branch block
    Zeng, Jiaxin
    He, Chen
    Zou, Fengwei
    Qin, Chaotong
    Xue, Siyuan
    Zhu, Haojie
    Li, Xiaofei
    Liu, Zhimin
    Wei, Yongyue
    Hou, Shuyan
    Qian, Zhiyong
    Wang, Yao
    Hou, Xiaofeng
    Yao, Yan
    Ellenbogen, Kenneth A.
    Fan, Xiaohan
    Zou, Jiangang
    HEART RHYTHM, 2023, 20 (10) : 1436 - 1444
  • [10] Conventional biventricular pacing is still preferred to conduction system pacing for atrioventricular block in patients with reduced ejection fraction and narrow QRS
    Glikson, Michael
    Jastrzebski, Marek
    Gold, Michael R.
    Ellenbogen, Kenneth
    Burri, Haran
    EUROPACE, 2023, 26 (01):