Cargando…
Pacing Characteristics of His Bundle Pacing vs. Left Bundle Branch Pacing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND: His bundle pacing (HBP) is a physiological pacing strategy, which aims to capture the His bundle-Purkinje system and synchronously activate the ventricles. Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a newly discovered physiological pacing technique similar to HBP. We conducted this meta-analysi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8980919/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35391846 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.849143 |
_version_ | 1784681497823805440 |
---|---|
author | Zhuo, Wen Zhong, Xiaojie Liu, Hualong Yu, Jianhua Chen, Qi Hu, Jinzhu Xiong, Qinmei Hong, Kui |
author_facet | Zhuo, Wen Zhong, Xiaojie Liu, Hualong Yu, Jianhua Chen, Qi Hu, Jinzhu Xiong, Qinmei Hong, Kui |
author_sort | Zhuo, Wen |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: His bundle pacing (HBP) is a physiological pacing strategy, which aims to capture the His bundle-Purkinje system and synchronously activate the ventricles. Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a newly discovered physiological pacing technique similar to HBP. We conducted this meta-analysis to compare the pacing parameters and clinical results between HBP and LBBP. METHODS: We systematically retrieved studies using the PubMed, Embase database, and Cochrane Library. Mean difference (MD) and relative risk (RR) with their 95% confidence intervals [CIs] were used to measure the outcomes. A random-effect model was used when studies were of high heterogeneity. RESULTS: A total of seven studies containing 867 individuals were included. Compared with HBP, LBBP was associated with higher implant success rates (RR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.05–1.18; I(2) = 60%, P = 0.0003), lower capture threshold at implantation (V/0.5 ms) (MD: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.35–0.90, I(2) = 89%, P < 0.0001) and capture threshold at follow-up (V/0.5 ms) (MD: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.34–1.18, I(2) = 93%, P = 0.0004), and larger sensed R wave amplitude (mV) at implantation (MD: 7.23, 95% CI: 5.29–9.16, P < 0.0001) and sensed R wave amplitude (mV) at follow-up (MD: 7.53, 95% CI: 6.85–8.22, P < 0.0001). In LBBP recipients, greater QRS wave complex reduction was found in the paced QRS duration at follow-up compared with HBP recipients at follow-up (MD: 6.12, 95% CI: 1.23–11.01, I(2) = 0%, P = 0.01). No statistical differences were found in procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, native left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEF), LVEF improvement, native QRS duration, and QRS reduction from the native QRS duration vs. paced QRS duration at implantation. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that pacing characteristics are better in LBBP compared with HBP. Further prospective studies are needed to validate the clinical advantages of LBBP. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8980919 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89809192022-04-06 Pacing Characteristics of His Bundle Pacing vs. Left Bundle Branch Pacing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Zhuo, Wen Zhong, Xiaojie Liu, Hualong Yu, Jianhua Chen, Qi Hu, Jinzhu Xiong, Qinmei Hong, Kui Front Cardiovasc Med Cardiovascular Medicine BACKGROUND: His bundle pacing (HBP) is a physiological pacing strategy, which aims to capture the His bundle-Purkinje system and synchronously activate the ventricles. Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a newly discovered physiological pacing technique similar to HBP. We conducted this meta-analysis to compare the pacing parameters and clinical results between HBP and LBBP. METHODS: We systematically retrieved studies using the PubMed, Embase database, and Cochrane Library. Mean difference (MD) and relative risk (RR) with their 95% confidence intervals [CIs] were used to measure the outcomes. A random-effect model was used when studies were of high heterogeneity. RESULTS: A total of seven studies containing 867 individuals were included. Compared with HBP, LBBP was associated with higher implant success rates (RR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.05–1.18; I(2) = 60%, P = 0.0003), lower capture threshold at implantation (V/0.5 ms) (MD: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.35–0.90, I(2) = 89%, P < 0.0001) and capture threshold at follow-up (V/0.5 ms) (MD: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.34–1.18, I(2) = 93%, P = 0.0004), and larger sensed R wave amplitude (mV) at implantation (MD: 7.23, 95% CI: 5.29–9.16, P < 0.0001) and sensed R wave amplitude (mV) at follow-up (MD: 7.53, 95% CI: 6.85–8.22, P < 0.0001). In LBBP recipients, greater QRS wave complex reduction was found in the paced QRS duration at follow-up compared with HBP recipients at follow-up (MD: 6.12, 95% CI: 1.23–11.01, I(2) = 0%, P = 0.01). No statistical differences were found in procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, native left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEF), LVEF improvement, native QRS duration, and QRS reduction from the native QRS duration vs. paced QRS duration at implantation. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that pacing characteristics are better in LBBP compared with HBP. Further prospective studies are needed to validate the clinical advantages of LBBP. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-03-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8980919/ /pubmed/35391846 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.849143 Text en Copyright © 2022 Zhuo, Zhong, Liu, Yu, Chen, Hu, Xiong and Hong. 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 Zhuo, Wen Zhong, Xiaojie Liu, Hualong Yu, Jianhua Chen, Qi Hu, Jinzhu Xiong, Qinmei Hong, Kui Pacing Characteristics of His Bundle Pacing vs. Left Bundle Branch Pacing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title | Pacing Characteristics of His Bundle Pacing vs. Left Bundle Branch Pacing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_full | Pacing Characteristics of His Bundle Pacing vs. Left Bundle Branch Pacing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_fullStr | Pacing Characteristics of His Bundle Pacing vs. Left Bundle Branch Pacing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Pacing Characteristics of His Bundle Pacing vs. Left Bundle Branch Pacing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_short | Pacing Characteristics of His Bundle Pacing vs. Left Bundle Branch Pacing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_sort | pacing characteristics of his bundle pacing vs. left bundle branch pacing: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Cardiovascular Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8980919/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35391846 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.849143 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhuowen pacingcharacteristicsofhisbundlepacingvsleftbundlebranchpacingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhongxiaojie pacingcharacteristicsofhisbundlepacingvsleftbundlebranchpacingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT liuhualong pacingcharacteristicsofhisbundlepacingvsleftbundlebranchpacingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT yujianhua pacingcharacteristicsofhisbundlepacingvsleftbundlebranchpacingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT chenqi pacingcharacteristicsofhisbundlepacingvsleftbundlebranchpacingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT hujinzhu pacingcharacteristicsofhisbundlepacingvsleftbundlebranchpacingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT xiongqinmei pacingcharacteristicsofhisbundlepacingvsleftbundlebranchpacingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT hongkui pacingcharacteristicsofhisbundlepacingvsleftbundlebranchpacingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |