MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1363020

Медицинская библиотека · Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024

Long-term efficacy of left bundle branch pacing and biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure complicated with left bundle branch block.

Li Jia, Yi Hongwei, Han Jun, Han Hongwei, Su Xi

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) can physiologically correct complete left bundle branch block (CLBBB), and has become the best alternative to biventricular pacing (BiVP).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of LBBP and BiVP in patients with heart failure (HF) complicated with CLBBB.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective study. Patients with HF complicated with CLBBB who underwent successful cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in Wuhan Asian Heart Hospital from June 2018 to June 2023 were enrolled and divided into LBBP group and BiVP group according to the pacing method. The primary endpoints were the absolute increase of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), and echocardiographic response rate. Secondary endpoints were all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization (HFH), NT-proBNP, paced QRS duration, pacing threshold, and procedural duration.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients were enrolled in this study, including 60 patients in LBBP group and 60 patients in BiVP group. The median follow-up time was 37 ± 19 months. Compared with BiVP group, LBBP group had a more significant increase in absolute LVEF (ΔLVEF) (14.8 ± 9.9% vs. 10.7 ± 9.0%, P = 0.02), a more significant reduction in LVEDD (56.9 ± 10.9 mm vs. 61.1 ± 10.8 mm, P = 0.03), and a higher echocardiographic super response rate (65% vs. 45%, P = 0.02). There were no significant differences in all-cause mortality (1.7% vs. 10.0%, P = 0.11) and HFH (6.7% vs. 13.3%, P = 0.22). In terms of paced QRS duration (128.7 ± 14.1 ms vs. 137.5 ± 16.5 ms, P = 0.002), pacing threshold (0.72 ± 0.21 V/0.4 ms vs. 1.39 ± 0.51 V/0.4 ms, P < 0.001), procedural duration (134.1 ± 32.2 min vs. 147.7 ± 39.4 min, P = 0.04), the LBBP group was superior to the BiVP group.

CONCLUSION

In nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) patients with HF combined with CLBBB and LVEF ≤ 35%, LBBP is better than BiVP.

Для цитирования: Li Jia, Yi Hongwei, Han Jun, Han Hongwei, Su Xi. Long-term efficacy of left bundle branch pacing and biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure complicated with left bundle branch block.. Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine. 2024. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1363020.
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.