Cargando…

Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Meta-Analysis

Background: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a recently proposed method for conduction system pacing. We performed a meta-analysis of controlled studies to compare the clinical outcome in patients who received LBBAP vs. biventricular pacing (BVP) for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT)....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Jiyi, Sun, Fengzhi, Wang, Zefeng, Sun, Jiao, Jiang, Xue, Zhao, Weilong, Zhang, Zhipeng, Liu, Lu, Zhang, Shulong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8180564/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34109227
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.669301
_version_ 1783704017744953344
author Liu, Jiyi
Sun, Fengzhi
Wang, Zefeng
Sun, Jiao
Jiang, Xue
Zhao, Weilong
Zhang, Zhipeng
Liu, Lu
Zhang, Shulong
author_facet Liu, Jiyi
Sun, Fengzhi
Wang, Zefeng
Sun, Jiao
Jiang, Xue
Zhao, Weilong
Zhang, Zhipeng
Liu, Lu
Zhang, Shulong
author_sort Liu, Jiyi
collection PubMed
description Background: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a recently proposed method for conduction system pacing. We performed a meta-analysis of controlled studies to compare the clinical outcome in patients who received LBBAP vs. biventricular pacing (BVP) for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane's Library databases were searched for relevant controlled studies. A random-effect model incorporating the potential heterogeneity was used to synthesize the results. Results: Four non-randomized controlled studies including 249 patients with heart failure (HF) for CRT were included, and the patients were followed for 6–12 months. Compared with BVP, LBBAP was associated with significantly shortened QRS duration [mean difference (MD): −29.18 ms, 95% confidence interval (CI): −33.55–24.80, I(2) = 0%, P < 0.001], improved left ventricular ejection fraction (MD: 6.93%, 95% CI: 4.69–9.17, I(2) = 0%, P < 0.001), reduced left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (MD: −2.96 mm, 95% CI: −5.48 to −0.44, I(2) = 0%, P = 0.02), and improved New York Heart Association class (MD: −0.54, 95% CI: −0.84 to −0.24, I(2) = 65%, P < 0.001). Moreover, patients who received LBBAP were more likely to achieve echocardiographic [odds ratio (OR): 5.04, 95% CI: 2.17–11.69, I(2) = 0%, P < 0.001] and clinical (OR: 7.33, 95% CI: 1.62–33.16, I(2) = 0%, P = 0.01) CRT responses. Conclusion: Current evidence from non-randomized studies suggests that LBBAP appears to be a promising method for CRT, which is associated with more remarkable improvements of symptoms and cardiac function in HF patients with indication for CRT.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8180564
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81805642021-06-08 Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Meta-Analysis Liu, Jiyi Sun, Fengzhi Wang, Zefeng Sun, Jiao Jiang, Xue Zhao, Weilong Zhang, Zhipeng Liu, Lu Zhang, Shulong Front Cardiovasc Med Cardiovascular Medicine Background: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a recently proposed method for conduction system pacing. We performed a meta-analysis of controlled studies to compare the clinical outcome in patients who received LBBAP vs. biventricular pacing (BVP) for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane's Library databases were searched for relevant controlled studies. A random-effect model incorporating the potential heterogeneity was used to synthesize the results. Results: Four non-randomized controlled studies including 249 patients with heart failure (HF) for CRT were included, and the patients were followed for 6–12 months. Compared with BVP, LBBAP was associated with significantly shortened QRS duration [mean difference (MD): −29.18 ms, 95% confidence interval (CI): −33.55–24.80, I(2) = 0%, P < 0.001], improved left ventricular ejection fraction (MD: 6.93%, 95% CI: 4.69–9.17, I(2) = 0%, P < 0.001), reduced left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (MD: −2.96 mm, 95% CI: −5.48 to −0.44, I(2) = 0%, P = 0.02), and improved New York Heart Association class (MD: −0.54, 95% CI: −0.84 to −0.24, I(2) = 65%, P < 0.001). Moreover, patients who received LBBAP were more likely to achieve echocardiographic [odds ratio (OR): 5.04, 95% CI: 2.17–11.69, I(2) = 0%, P < 0.001] and clinical (OR: 7.33, 95% CI: 1.62–33.16, I(2) = 0%, P = 0.01) CRT responses. Conclusion: Current evidence from non-randomized studies suggests that LBBAP appears to be a promising method for CRT, which is associated with more remarkable improvements of symptoms and cardiac function in HF patients with indication for CRT. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-05-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8180564/ /pubmed/34109227 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.669301 Text en Copyright © 2021 Liu, Sun, Wang, Sun, Jiang, Zhao, Zhang, Liu and Zhang. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Cardiovascular Medicine
Liu, Jiyi
Sun, Fengzhi
Wang, Zefeng
Sun, Jiao
Jiang, Xue
Zhao, Weilong
Zhang, Zhipeng
Liu, Lu
Zhang, Shulong
Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Meta-Analysis
title Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Meta-Analysis
title_full Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Meta-Analysis
title_short Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Meta-Analysis
title_sort left bundle branch area pacing vs. biventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy: a meta-analysis
topic Cardiovascular Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8180564/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34109227
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.669301
work_keys_str_mv AT liujiyi leftbundlebranchareapacingvsbiventricularpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyametaanalysis
AT sunfengzhi leftbundlebranchareapacingvsbiventricularpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyametaanalysis
AT wangzefeng leftbundlebranchareapacingvsbiventricularpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyametaanalysis
AT sunjiao leftbundlebranchareapacingvsbiventricularpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyametaanalysis
AT jiangxue leftbundlebranchareapacingvsbiventricularpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyametaanalysis
AT zhaoweilong leftbundlebranchareapacingvsbiventricularpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyametaanalysis
AT zhangzhipeng leftbundlebranchareapacingvsbiventricularpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyametaanalysis
AT liulu leftbundlebranchareapacingvsbiventricularpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyametaanalysis
AT zhangshulong leftbundlebranchareapacingvsbiventricularpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyametaanalysis