医学
心脏再同步化治疗
左束支阻滞
心脏病学
射血分数
内科学
QRS波群
心力衰竭
束支阻滞
窦性心律
心电图
心房颤动
作者
Ginés Elvira Ruíz,Pablo Peñafiel-Verdú,Carmen Muñoz‐Esparza,Juan Antonio Martı́nez,Juan José Sánchez Muñoz,Francisco J. García‐Almagro,Mariela Salar-Alcaraz,Francisco J. Pastor‐Pérez,Noelia Fernández-Villa,M. Veas-Porlán,M Martinez-Herrera,David José Vázquez Andrés,Antonio Jiménez‐Aceituna,Domingo A. Pascual‐Figal,Arcadi Garcı́a-Alberola
标识
DOI:10.1093/eurheartj/ehab724.0400
摘要
Abstract Background Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular pacing has demonstrated clinical benefits in heart failure patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and ventricular dysfunction. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) results in a relatively short QRS duration (QRSd) with fast left ventricular activation and could be considered as an alternative to conventional CRT. Purpose The aim of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility and outcomes of LBBAP in patients with indications for CRT. Methods Consecutive patients with indications for CRT were included. LBBAP was performed via transventricular septal approach (1–3). We aimed to achieve a paced QRS with right bundle branch conduction delay morphology, a stimulus to peak left ventricular activation time (S-LVAT) <100ms and/or a QRSd ≤130ms. AV delay programming was individualized in patients in sinus rhythm, taking consideration of the AV conduction, programming the one that generated the shortest QRSd at rest. Rate adaptive AV was also activated in these patients. Pacing electrical and echocardiographic parameters were recorded at baseline and during follow-up. Results LBBAP was achieved in 19 of 21 (90.5%) patients with indication for CRT. Indications were heart failure with LBBB and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% in 8 (42%), AV node ablation or AV block with LVEF <50% and high expected RV pacing burden in 9 (47%), 1 pacing-induced cardiomyopathy and 1 patient with biventricular pacemaker malfunction (high LV capture threshold). The mean follow-up was 4.6±1.7 months and the percentage of ventricular pacing was 93.4±13.9%. There were no device-related complications during this period. LBBA capture threshold was 0.6±0.3V at 0.4ms at the implantation, and remained stable (0.7±0.1 V, p=0.17). The lead impedance and R-wave amplitude at implantation were 636±106 ohms and 13.4±6.8 mV, and 541±88 ohms and 13.0±5.1 mV during the follow-up (p<0.001 and p=0.27, respectively). Mean S-LVAT was 85.5±13.9 ms, and mean QRSd was 122±9 ms, that remained stable during follow-up (122 vs 124 ms, p=0.21). In patients with LBBB, a significant narrowing of paced QRSd was achieved (160.9±16.7 vs. 123.9±9.7 ms, p<0.001). Mean LVEF increased by 15.9%, from 35.4±8.9% at baseline to 51.3±9.8% at follow-up (p<0.001) in the overall population, and 14.5% (from 32.7±4.8% to 47.2±10.7%, p=0.001) in patients with LBBB. After one month, estimated time for elective replacement was 11.9±0.4 years. Conclusions LBBPA was successfully achieved in 90.5% of the patients with indication for CRT, with good and stable pacing electrical parameters, long estimated battery longevity and relatively narrow QRS, and was associated with improvement in cardiac function. LBBAP may be considered as a first-line option for patients with indications for CRT. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI