Department of Interventional Cardiology, Brasov County Clinical Emergency Hospital, Brasov, 500326, Romania.
5th Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, "Iuliu Hațieganu" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, 400012, Romania.
Clin Interv Aging. 2023 Jun 13;18:941-949. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S412808. eCollection 2023.
Although feasibility studies have included older patients, specific data for His bundle pacing (HBP) in this population is scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and mid-term performance of HBP in the elderly (70 to 79 years old) versus the very elderly (80 years old and above) patients with conventional indications for pacing.
About 105 patients older than 70 years of age with attempted HBP from the 1st of January 2019 to the 31st of December 2021 were reviewed. Clinical and procedural characteristics were recorded at baseline, and after a mid-term follow-up period.
The procedural success rate was similar in both age groups (68.49% vs 65.62%). There was no significant difference in pacing or sensing thresholds, impedance, and fluoroscopy times. For both age intervals, patients with a baseline narrow QRS maintained a similar QRS duration after pacing, while in patients with a wide QRS, the paced QRS was significantly shorter. Baseline QRS duration, left bundle branch block morphology, and ejection fraction, were significantly associated with HBP procedural failure. The mean follow-up period was 830.34 days for the elderly and 722.76 days for the very elderly. After the follow-up period, both sensing and pacing thresholds were similar between the groups. Compared to the baseline values, there were no significant changes in both pacing and sensing parameters, irrespective of the age interval. During follow-up, no lead dislodgements were recorded. There were two cases of significant pacing threshold rise in the elderly (4%) and three cases in the very elderly group (14.2%) which were managed conservatively, without lead revision.
In elderly and very elderly patients, HBP is a feasible procedure associated with constant pacing and sensing parameters and with low complication rates over mid-term follow-up.
虽然可行性研究已经纳入了老年患者,但针对该人群的希氏束起搏(HBP)具体数据仍较为匮乏。本研究旨在评估在伴有传统起搏适应证的高龄(70-79 岁)和超高龄(80 岁及以上)患者中进行 HBP 的可行性和中期表现。
回顾了 2019 年 1 月 1 日至 2021 年 12 月 31 日期间尝试行 HBP 的 105 例 70 岁以上患者的临床和程序特征。在基线和中期随访期间记录这些特征。
两组的程序成功率相似(68.49%比 65.62%)。起搏和感知阈值、阻抗和透视时间无显著差异。对于两个年龄组,基线 QRS 波群较窄的患者起搏后 QRS 波群持续时间相似,而基线 QRS 波群较宽的患者起搏后的 QRS 波群显著缩短。基线 QRS 波群宽度、左束支阻滞形态和射血分数与 HBP 程序失败显著相关。高龄组的平均随访时间为 830.34 天,超高龄组为 722.76 天。随访后,两组的感知和起搏阈值相似。与基线值相比,无论年龄间隔如何,起搏和感知参数均无显著变化。随访期间,未记录到导联脱位。高龄组有 2 例(4%)和超高龄组有 3 例(14.2%)出现显著起搏阈值升高,这些患者均采用保守治疗,未进行导联修正。
在高龄和超高龄患者中,HBP 是一种可行的程序,具有稳定的起搏和感知参数,并在中期随访中具有较低的并发症发生率。