Geisinger Heart Institute, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
Division of Cardiology, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida.
Heart Rhythm. 2022 Aug;19(8):1272-1280. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2022.04.024. Epub 2022 Apr 30.
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) using biventricular pacing (BVP) is effective in patients with heart failure, left bundle branch block (LBBB), and reduced left ventricular function. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has been reported as an alternative option for CRT.
The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and outcomes of LBBAP in patients who failed conventional BVP because of coronary venous (CV) lead complications or who were nonresponders to BVP.
At 16 international centers, LBBAP was attempted in patients with conventional CRT indication who failed BVP because of CV lead complications or lack of therapeutic response to BVP. Heart failure hospitalization (HFH) and death, echocardiographic outcomes, procedural data, pacing parameters, and lead complications including CV lead failure are reported.
LBBAP was successfully performed in 200 patients (CV lead failures 156; nonresponders 44) (age 68 ± 11 years; female 35%; LBBB 55%; right ventricular pacing 23%; ischemic cardiomyopathy 28%; nonischemic cardiomyopathy 63%; left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] ≤35% in 80%). Procedural duration was 119.5 ± 59.6 minutes, and fluoroscopy duration was 25.7 ± 18.5 minutes. LBBAP threshold and R-wave amplitudes were 0.68 ± 0.35 V @ 0.45 ms and 10.4 ± 5 mV at implant, respectively, and remained stable during mean follow-up of 12 ± 10.1 months. LBBAP resulted in significant QRS narrowing from 170 ± 28 ms to 139 ± 25 ms (P <.001) with V R-wave peak times of 85 ± 17 ms. LVEF improved from 29% ± 10% at baseline to 40% ± 12% (P <.001) during follow-up. The risk of death or HFH was lower in those with CV lead failure than in nonresponders (hazard ratio 0.357; 95% confidence interval 0.168-0.756; P = .007) CONCLUSION: LBBAP is a viable alternative to CRT in patients who failed conventional BVP due to CV lead failure or who were nonresponders.
心脏再同步治疗(CRT)采用双心室起搏(BVP)对心力衰竭、左束支传导阻滞(LBBB)和左心室功能降低的患者有效。已经报道左束支区域起搏(LBBAP)是 CRT 的另一种选择。
本研究旨在评估因冠状静脉(CV)导线并发症而无法接受常规 BVP 或对 BVP 无反应的患者行 LBBAP 的可行性和结果。
在 16 个国际中心,对因 CV 导线并发症或对 BVP 治疗无反应而无法接受常规 CRT 适应证的患者尝试行 LBBAP。报告心力衰竭住院(HFH)和死亡、超声心动图结果、程序数据、起搏参数以及包括 CV 导线故障在内的导线并发症。
200 例患者(CV 导线故障 156 例;无反应者 44 例)(年龄 68±11 岁;女性 35%;LBBB 55%;右心室起搏 23%;缺血性心肌病 28%;非缺血性心肌病 63%;左心室射血分数[LVEF]≤35%者 80%)成功进行了 LBBAP。手术时间为 119.5±59.6 分钟,透视时间为 25.7±18.5 分钟。LBBAP 阈值和 R 波振幅分别为植入时 0.68±0.35 V@0.45 ms 和 10.4±5 mV,在平均 12±10.1 个月的随访期间保持稳定。LBBAP 使 QRS 波从 170±28 ms 显著变窄至 139±25 ms(P<.001),V 波 R 波峰值时间为 85±17 ms。LVEF 从基线时的 29%±10%改善至随访时的 40%±12%(P<.001)。与无反应者相比,因 CV 导线故障而无法接受常规 BVP 的患者的死亡或 HFH 风险较低(风险比 0.357;95%置信区间 0.168-0.756;P=.007)。
对于因 CV 导线故障而无法接受常规 BVP 或对 BVP 无反应的患者,LBBAP 是 CRT 的可行替代方法。