JACC. Clinical electrophysiology · 2018
The Efficacy of His Bundle Pacing: Lessons Learned From Implementation for the First Time at an Experienced Electrophysiology Center.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Bhatt Advay G, Musat Dan L, Milstein Nicolle, Pimienta Jacqueline, Flynn Laura, Sichrovsky Tina, Preminger Mark W, Mittal Suneet
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the clinical and procedural characteristics impacting outcomes during implementation of a His bundle pacing (HBP) program in a real-world setting.
BACKGROUND: Right ventricular pacing is associated with an elevated risk of heart failure, but device reprogramming and upgrades have significant challenges. HBP has emerged as an alternative and is reported to be highly successful in the hands of highly experienced centers.
METHODS: All patients referred for permanent pacemaker implantation at the Valley Hospital (Ridgewood, New Jersey) between October 2015 and October 2017 were evaluated; a subset of 24% was selected for HBP.
RESULTS: Permanent HBP was feasible with an acute implant success rate of 75%. HBP in the presence of bundle branch block (64% vs. 85%; p = 0.05) or complete heart block (56% vs. 83%; p = 0.03) was significantly less successful. The pattern of atrioventricular block in combination with bundle branch block (BBB) further affects outcomes. HBP is highly successful across the spectrum of atrioventricular block pattern severity in the absence of BBB. In the presence of BBB, Mobitz II AV block and complete heart block significantly attenuated HBP success compared with Mobitz I atrioventricular block (62% vs. 100%; p = 0.02). A rising threshold was observed in 30%, and 8% required lead intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: HBP was feasible and readily learned with a high implant success in the hands of experienced electrophysiologists without prior exposure to the technique. BBB and atrioventricular block pattern appears to affect success. The technique is limited by a high rate of rising thresholds and lead intervention. These data have important implications for patient selection.
BACKGROUND: Right ventricular pacing is associated with an elevated risk of heart failure, but device reprogramming and upgrades have significant challenges. HBP has emerged as an alternative and is reported to be highly successful in the hands of highly experienced centers.
METHODS: All patients referred for permanent pacemaker implantation at the Valley Hospital (Ridgewood, New Jersey) between October 2015 and October 2017 were evaluated; a subset of 24% was selected for HBP.
RESULTS: Permanent HBP was feasible with an acute implant success rate of 75%. HBP in the presence of bundle branch block (64% vs. 85%; p = 0.05) or complete heart block (56% vs. 83%; p = 0.03) was significantly less successful. The pattern of atrioventricular block in combination with bundle branch block (BBB) further affects outcomes. HBP is highly successful across the spectrum of atrioventricular block pattern severity in the absence of BBB. In the presence of BBB, Mobitz II AV block and complete heart block significantly attenuated HBP success compared with Mobitz I atrioventricular block (62% vs. 100%; p = 0.02). A rising threshold was observed in 30%, and 8% required lead intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: HBP was feasible and readily learned with a high implant success in the hands of experienced electrophysiologists without prior exposure to the technique. BBB and atrioventricular block pattern appears to affect success. The technique is limited by a high rate of rising thresholds and lead intervention. These data have important implications for patient selection.