Cargando…

Short‐term and intermediate‐term performance and safety of left bundle branch pacing

INTRODUCTION: Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a promising new method for patients with pacing indications. This study aims to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LBBP in a relatively longer time span. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 164 patients were recruited for LBBP in this study. Among th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Guo, Jincun, Li, Linlin, Meng, Fanqi, Su, Maolong, Huang, Xinyi, Chen, Simei, Li, Qiang, Chang, Dong, Cai, Binni
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317583/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32239598
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jce.14463
_version_ 1783550662399754240
author Guo, Jincun
Li, Linlin
Meng, Fanqi
Su, Maolong
Huang, Xinyi
Chen, Simei
Li, Qiang
Chang, Dong
Cai, Binni
author_facet Guo, Jincun
Li, Linlin
Meng, Fanqi
Su, Maolong
Huang, Xinyi
Chen, Simei
Li, Qiang
Chang, Dong
Cai, Binni
author_sort Guo, Jincun
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a promising new method for patients with pacing indications. This study aims to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LBBP in a relatively longer time span. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 164 patients were recruited for LBBP in this study. Among these patients, 148 patients had pacing indications due to symptomatic bradycardia while the other 16 patients had indications for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). LBBP was successful in 89.0% (146/164) of all recruited patients. Intracardiac and surface electrographic parameters and image data were documented during the LBBP procedure. The mean paced QRS duration (pQRSD) and the mean stimulus to left ventricular activation time (stim‐LVAT) was 106.0 ± 12.9 ms and 64.4 ± 13.7 ms respectively. Left bundle branch (LBB) potentials were recorded in 89 patients. Forty‐three of whom had sick sinus syndrome (SSS), and 46 had atrioventricular block (AVB). The presence of LBB potential was more common in patients with SSS (82.7% vs 57.5%, P = .002). No significant differences in pQRSD, stim‐LVAT, or capture threshold were detected between patient groups with or without LBB potential. Patients were followed up at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after the procedure. Pacing parameters and the echocardiographic data remained stable within a mean follow‐up period of 8.6 ± 4.3 months. No serious complication caused by this procedure was found in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Successful LBBP carried an aspect of short pQRSD and stim‐LVAT while the LBB potential was not the prerequisite and necessary feature. The LBBP procedure had a high success rate with satisfied and stable lead parameters during short and intermediate‐term observations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7317583
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73175832020-06-29 Short‐term and intermediate‐term performance and safety of left bundle branch pacing Guo, Jincun Li, Linlin Meng, Fanqi Su, Maolong Huang, Xinyi Chen, Simei Li, Qiang Chang, Dong Cai, Binni J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Original ‐ Devices INTRODUCTION: Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a promising new method for patients with pacing indications. This study aims to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LBBP in a relatively longer time span. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 164 patients were recruited for LBBP in this study. Among these patients, 148 patients had pacing indications due to symptomatic bradycardia while the other 16 patients had indications for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). LBBP was successful in 89.0% (146/164) of all recruited patients. Intracardiac and surface electrographic parameters and image data were documented during the LBBP procedure. The mean paced QRS duration (pQRSD) and the mean stimulus to left ventricular activation time (stim‐LVAT) was 106.0 ± 12.9 ms and 64.4 ± 13.7 ms respectively. Left bundle branch (LBB) potentials were recorded in 89 patients. Forty‐three of whom had sick sinus syndrome (SSS), and 46 had atrioventricular block (AVB). The presence of LBB potential was more common in patients with SSS (82.7% vs 57.5%, P = .002). No significant differences in pQRSD, stim‐LVAT, or capture threshold were detected between patient groups with or without LBB potential. Patients were followed up at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after the procedure. Pacing parameters and the echocardiographic data remained stable within a mean follow‐up period of 8.6 ± 4.3 months. No serious complication caused by this procedure was found in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Successful LBBP carried an aspect of short pQRSD and stim‐LVAT while the LBB potential was not the prerequisite and necessary feature. The LBBP procedure had a high success rate with satisfied and stable lead parameters during short and intermediate‐term observations. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-04-08 2020-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7317583/ /pubmed/32239598 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jce.14463 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original ‐ Devices
Guo, Jincun
Li, Linlin
Meng, Fanqi
Su, Maolong
Huang, Xinyi
Chen, Simei
Li, Qiang
Chang, Dong
Cai, Binni
Short‐term and intermediate‐term performance and safety of left bundle branch pacing
title Short‐term and intermediate‐term performance and safety of left bundle branch pacing
title_full Short‐term and intermediate‐term performance and safety of left bundle branch pacing
title_fullStr Short‐term and intermediate‐term performance and safety of left bundle branch pacing
title_full_unstemmed Short‐term and intermediate‐term performance and safety of left bundle branch pacing
title_short Short‐term and intermediate‐term performance and safety of left bundle branch pacing
title_sort short‐term and intermediate‐term performance and safety of left bundle branch pacing
topic Original ‐ Devices
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317583/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32239598
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jce.14463
work_keys_str_mv AT guojincun shorttermandintermediatetermperformanceandsafetyofleftbundlebranchpacing
AT lilinlin shorttermandintermediatetermperformanceandsafetyofleftbundlebranchpacing
AT mengfanqi shorttermandintermediatetermperformanceandsafetyofleftbundlebranchpacing
AT sumaolong shorttermandintermediatetermperformanceandsafetyofleftbundlebranchpacing
AT huangxinyi shorttermandintermediatetermperformanceandsafetyofleftbundlebranchpacing
AT chensimei shorttermandintermediatetermperformanceandsafetyofleftbundlebranchpacing
AT liqiang shorttermandintermediatetermperformanceandsafetyofleftbundlebranchpacing
AT changdong shorttermandintermediatetermperformanceandsafetyofleftbundlebranchpacing
AT caibinni shorttermandintermediatetermperformanceandsafetyofleftbundlebranchpacing