Heart rhythm · 2022
Atrioventricular junction ablation in patients with conduction system pacing leads: A comparison of His-bundle vs left bundle branch area pacing leads.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Pillai Ajay, Kolominsky Jeffrey, Koneru Jayanthi N, Kron Jordana, Shepard Richard K, Kalahasty Gautham, Huang Weijian, Verma Atul, Ellenbogen Kenneth A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Single-center studies have shown feasibility of conduction system pacing (CSP) via His-bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing atrioventricular junction ablation (AVJA).
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes in patients with HBP and LBBAP leads undergoing AVJA.
METHODS: Consecutive patients with CSP leads referred for AVJA between October 2014 and May 2021 were included. Pacing lead characteristics, procedural characteristics, complications, and long-term outcomes were assessed.
RESULTS: One hundred five AVJA procedures (55 HBP, 50 LBBAP) were performed in 98 patients (48 HBP, 50 LBBAP). The acute success rate of the AVJA procedure was 94% vs 100% (P = .11) in HBP vs LBBAP groups. Seven (14%) redo AVJA procedures were required in the HBP group. Mean procedural time (44 ± 24 min vs 34 ± 16 min; P = .02) and mean fluoroscopy time (16 ± 18 min vs 7 ± 6 min; P <.001) were significantly longer in the HBP vs LBBAP group. An acute rise in threshold was noted in 8 cases (14.5%), and 4 (8%) developed exit block after AVJA in HBP patients. Chronic HBP threshold ≥2.5 V was seen in 23 patients (48%), and 4 (8%) HBP leads were deactivated. CSP preserved ejection fraction (EF) in the overall cohort (N = 70; 53% ± 10% vs 55% ± 10%; P = .09) and significantly improved in those with reduced EF <50% at baseline (N = 16; 37% ± 7.6% vs 46% ± 13%; P = .02).
CONCLUSION: AVJA in the presence of an LBBAP lead is associated with a higher success rate and fewer acute and chronic lead-related complications. CSP with either HBP or LBBAP preserves left ventricular systolic function in patients with refractory atrial fibrillation post AVJA.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes in patients with HBP and LBBAP leads undergoing AVJA.
METHODS: Consecutive patients with CSP leads referred for AVJA between October 2014 and May 2021 were included. Pacing lead characteristics, procedural characteristics, complications, and long-term outcomes were assessed.
RESULTS: One hundred five AVJA procedures (55 HBP, 50 LBBAP) were performed in 98 patients (48 HBP, 50 LBBAP). The acute success rate of the AVJA procedure was 94% vs 100% (P = .11) in HBP vs LBBAP groups. Seven (14%) redo AVJA procedures were required in the HBP group. Mean procedural time (44 ± 24 min vs 34 ± 16 min; P = .02) and mean fluoroscopy time (16 ± 18 min vs 7 ± 6 min; P <.001) were significantly longer in the HBP vs LBBAP group. An acute rise in threshold was noted in 8 cases (14.5%), and 4 (8%) developed exit block after AVJA in HBP patients. Chronic HBP threshold ≥2.5 V was seen in 23 patients (48%), and 4 (8%) HBP leads were deactivated. CSP preserved ejection fraction (EF) in the overall cohort (N = 70; 53% ± 10% vs 55% ± 10%; P = .09) and significantly improved in those with reduced EF <50% at baseline (N = 16; 37% ± 7.6% vs 46% ± 13%; P = .02).
CONCLUSION: AVJA in the presence of an LBBAP lead is associated with a higher success rate and fewer acute and chronic lead-related complications. CSP with either HBP or LBBAP preserves left ventricular systolic function in patients with refractory atrial fibrillation post AVJA.