MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1093/europace/euaf271

Медицинская библиотека · Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025

Mid- to long-term mechanical performance of left bundle branch area pacing: a comprehensive echocardiographic comparison of capture modalities.

Estévez Paniagua Álvaro, Briongos-Figuero Sem, Tapia Martínez Manuel, Jiménez Loeches Silvia, Sánchez Hernández Ana, Heredero Palomo Delia, Sánchez López Elena, Luna Cabadas Arantxa, Muñoz-Aguilera Roberto

СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

AIMS: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) electrical performance is well documented. Nevertheless, the long-term mechanical implications, and differences between left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP), remain unclear. This study assessed mechanical performance of LBBAP in a mid- to long-term post-implantation setting and compared capture types.

METHODS AND

RESULTS

In this prospective, single-centre study, 88 patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction and successful LBBAP underwent paired echocardiography during intrinsic and paced rhythm (median 18 months post-implant). Two-dimensional, speckle-tracking and myocardial work (MW) indices were analysed. Adjusted linear mixed-effects models for repeated measures compared LBBAP vs. intrinsic rhythm and LBBP vs. LVSP differences. Independent predictors of changes in MW indices were sought with multivariate regression. Left bundle branch area pacing showed lower left ventricular volumes than intrinsic rhythm and a decrease in global longitudinal strain (16.2% vs. 16.8%, P = 0.040). Global constructive work (2232.8 vs. 2028.8 mmHg%, P < 0.001) and global wasted work (266.2 vs. 219.1 mmHg%, P = 0.003) were higher during pacing, without differences in global work index (1607.8 vs. 1536.7 mmHg%, P = 0.171) or global work efficiency (GWE) (88.3% vs. 89.3%, P = 0.092). Between LBBP (n = 63) and LVSP (n = 25), no statistically significant differences were found in any parameter after covariate adjustment (all P > 0.28). In multivariate analysis, LVSP independently predicted modest GWE decrease.

CONCLUSION

In patients with preserved LVEF, LBBAP maintains global mechanical performance comparable to intrinsic rhythm while increasing constructive and wasted work. Mechanical performance is largely similar between LBBP and LVSP, supporting the physiological value of LBBAP regardless of capture type.

Для цитирования: Estévez Paniagua Álvaro, Briongos-Figuero Sem, Tapia Martínez Manuel, Jiménez Loeches Silvia, Sánchez Hernández Ana, Heredero Palomo Delia, Sánchez López Elena, Luna Cabadas Arantxa, Muñoz-Aguilera Roberto. Mid- to long-term mechanical performance of left bundle branch area pacing: a comprehensive echocardiographic comparison of capture modalities.. Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology. 2025. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euaf271.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.