Heart rhythm · 2026
Electrophysiological predictors of super-response to left bundle branch area pacing in nonischemic cardiomyopathy: The PRECISION LBBAP study.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shroff Jenish P, Chandh Raja Deep, Abhilash Sreevilasam P, Mehta Abhinav, Abhayaratna Walter P, Vijayaraman Pugazhendhi, Sanders Prashanthan, Pathak Rajeev K
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is an emerging alternative to biventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), but variability in response remains poorly understood.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess differences in cardiac activation between super-responders and partial responders to LBBAP and identify electrophysiological predictors of response using noninvasive electrocardiographic imaging.
METHODS: Patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy and left bundle branch (LBB) block (QRS >130 ms) who underwent LBBAP were enrolled. 10 super-responders (≥20% improvement in left ventricular [LV] ejection fraction) and 10 partial responders (<10% improvement) were matched 1:1. electrocardiographic imaging (CardioInsight, Medtronic) was performed during intrinsic rhythm (CRT-off) and during unipolar pacing (CRT-on) at 2 V and 0.4 ms. Changes in biventricular total activation time, LV activation time (LVtat), and ventricular electrical uncoupling were assessed.
RESULTS: Compared with partial responders, super-responders exhibited significantly greater reductions in LVtat (mean difference 15.2 ms; 95% confidence interval 3.4-27.1; P = .015) and biventricular total activation time (29.0 [interquartile range {IQR} 22.0-39.8] vs 16.5 [IQR 3.0-27.0] ms; P = .045), alongside superior ventricular electrical uncoupling improvement (55.7% [IQR 39.0-67.0] vs 5.8% [IQR -18.0 to 35.5]; P = .014). Confirmed LBB capture was associated with substantially greater reduction in LVtat than LV septal capture (33.2 ± 10.4 ms vs 13.1 ± 9.9 ms; P < .001); consequently, an LVtat reduction of ≥26.86% predicted LBB capture with high accuracy (area under the curve 0.96; 83% sensitivity; 100% specificity). Confirmed LBB capture conferred 7.4-fold higher odds of super-response in Bayesian regression.
CONCLUSION: Super-response to CRT via LBBAP was associated with greater reductions in ventricular dyssynchrony. The presence of definitive LBB capture emerged as a strong predictor of super-response, emphasizing the mechanistic relevance of conduction system engagement for optimizing CRT outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess differences in cardiac activation between super-responders and partial responders to LBBAP and identify electrophysiological predictors of response using noninvasive electrocardiographic imaging.
METHODS: Patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy and left bundle branch (LBB) block (QRS >130 ms) who underwent LBBAP were enrolled. 10 super-responders (≥20% improvement in left ventricular [LV] ejection fraction) and 10 partial responders (<10% improvement) were matched 1:1. electrocardiographic imaging (CardioInsight, Medtronic) was performed during intrinsic rhythm (CRT-off) and during unipolar pacing (CRT-on) at 2 V and 0.4 ms. Changes in biventricular total activation time, LV activation time (LVtat), and ventricular electrical uncoupling were assessed.
RESULTS: Compared with partial responders, super-responders exhibited significantly greater reductions in LVtat (mean difference 15.2 ms; 95% confidence interval 3.4-27.1; P = .015) and biventricular total activation time (29.0 [interquartile range {IQR} 22.0-39.8] vs 16.5 [IQR 3.0-27.0] ms; P = .045), alongside superior ventricular electrical uncoupling improvement (55.7% [IQR 39.0-67.0] vs 5.8% [IQR -18.0 to 35.5]; P = .014). Confirmed LBB capture was associated with substantially greater reduction in LVtat than LV septal capture (33.2 ± 10.4 ms vs 13.1 ± 9.9 ms; P < .001); consequently, an LVtat reduction of ≥26.86% predicted LBB capture with high accuracy (area under the curve 0.96; 83% sensitivity; 100% specificity). Confirmed LBB capture conferred 7.4-fold higher odds of super-response in Bayesian regression.
CONCLUSION: Super-response to CRT via LBBAP was associated with greater reductions in ventricular dyssynchrony. The presence of definitive LBB capture emerged as a strong predictor of super-response, emphasizing the mechanistic relevance of conduction system engagement for optimizing CRT outcomes.