Suppr超能文献

在心房颤动患者中比较左束支与希氏束起搏的同步性:一项患者内对照研究。

Comparison of synchronization between left bundle branch and his bundle pacing in atrial fibrillation patients: An intra-patient-controlled study.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310016, China.

Department of Diagnostic Ultrasound & Echocardiography, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310016, China.

出版信息

Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2021 Sep;44(9):1523-1531. doi: 10.1111/pace.14331. Epub 2021 Aug 24.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

His bundle pacing (HBP) is a physiological pacing strategy to preserve the electrical synchrony of ventricular conduction and left ventricular (LV) function. Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) has emerged as an alternative physiological pacing technique.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate cardiac electrical and mechanical synchrony comparing LBBP and HBP in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS

Consecutive patients with symptomatic bradycardia and AF were enrolled from January to June of 2019. The cardiac electrical and mechanical synchrony in different pacing mode were evaluated at baseline and after implantation.

RESULTS

Both HBP and LBBP were performed in 20 patients. LBBP significantly widened the QRS duration compared with the intrinsic conduction (113.2 ± 14.5  vs. 96.5 ± 16.2 ms; p = .01), while HBP did not (104.5 ± 22.3  vs. 96.5 ± 16.2 ms; p = .12). Both LBBP and HBP patients had similar LV myocardial strain measurements for the mechanical synchrony evaluation without significant change compared with baseline. There was no significant difference in right ventricular synchrony measurement between LBBP and HBP. Compared to HBP, LBBP had less interventricular synchrony (IMVD, 14.7 ± 9.2  vs. 3.1 ± 12.7 ms, p < .01; Ts-LV-RV, 37.9 ± 10.7  vs. 18.5 ± 10.8 ms, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although LBBP's a physiological pacing mode can achieve a similar cardiac electrical and mechanical synchronization when compared to HBP, LBBP results in modest delay in RV activation, and the clinical implication remains to be studied.

摘要

背景

希氏束起搏(HBP)是一种生理性起搏策略,可保持心室传导的电同步性和左心室(LV)功能。左束支起搏(LBBP)已成为一种替代的生理性起搏技术。

目的

评估在永久性心房颤动(AF)患者中比较 LBBP 和 HBP 的心脏电和机械同步性。

方法

连续入选 2019 年 1 月至 6 月期间因症状性心动过缓合并 AF 的患者。在基线和植入后评估不同起搏模式的心脏电和机械同步性。

结果

共 20 例患者进行了 HBP 和 LBBP。与固有传导相比,LBBP 显著加宽了 QRS 时限(113.2±14.5 vs. 96.5±16.2 ms;p=0.01),而 HBP 没有(104.5±22.3 vs. 96.5±16.2 ms;p=0.12)。LBBP 和 HBP 患者的 LV 心肌应变测量值用于机械同步性评估,与基线相比没有显著变化。LBBP 和 HBP 之间右心室同步性测量值没有显著差异。与 HBP 相比,LBBP 的室间同步性更小(IMVD,14.7±9.2 vs. 3.1±12.7 ms,p<0.01;Ts-LV-RV,37.9±10.7 vs. 18.5±10.8 ms,p<0.001)。

结论

尽管 LBBP 是一种生理性起搏模式,与 HBP 相比可以实现相似的心脏电和机械同步性,但 LBBP 会导致 RV 激活略有延迟,其临床意义仍需研究。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9083/9291595/086ca5eca7ec/PACE-44-1523-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验