Suppr超能文献

经导管主动脉瓣植入术后左束支区域起搏与传统起搏治疗主动脉瓣狭窄的比较:LATVIA 研究。

Left bundle branch area versus conventional pacing after transcatheter valve implant for aortic stenosis: the LATVIA study.

机构信息

Clinica Cardiologica, Dipartimento Toraco-Cardio-Vascolare, Ospedale Maggiore della Carità, Novara.

Cardiologia 3. A. De' Gasperis Cardio Center, ASST GOM Niguarda Hospital.

出版信息

J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2024 Jun 1;25(6):450-456. doi: 10.2459/JCM.0000000000001619. Epub 2024 Apr 1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Atrioventricular block (AVB) is a frequent complication in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Right apex ventricular pacing (RVP) represents the standard treatment but may induce cardiomyopathy over the long term. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a promising alternative, minimizing the risk of desynchrony. However, available evidence with LBBAP after TAVI is still low.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility and safety of LBBAP for AVB post-TAVI compared with RVP.

METHODS

Consecutive patients developing AVB early after TAVI were enrolled between 1 January 2022 and 31 December 2022 at three high-volume hospitals and received LBBAP or RVP. Data on procedure and at short-term follow-up (at least 3 months) were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients (61% men, mean age 83 ± 6 years) were included; 20 patients (53%) received LBBAP. Procedural success was obtained in all patients according to chosen pacing strategy. Electrical pacing performance at implant and after a mean follow-up of 4.2 ± 2.8 months was clinically equivalent for both pacing modalities. In the LBBAP group, procedural time was longer (70 ± 17 versus 58 ± 15 min in the RVP group, P  = 0.02) and paced QRS was shorter (120 ± 19 versus 155 ± 12 ms at implant, P  < 0.001; 119 ± 18 versus 157 ± 9 ms at follow-up, P  < 0.001). Complication rates did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In patients with AVB after TAVI, LBBAP is feasible and safe, resulting in a narrow QRS duration, either acutely and during the follow-up, compared with RVP. Further studies are needed to evaluate if LBBAP reduces pacing-induced cardiomyopathy in this clinical setting.

摘要

背景

房室传导阻滞(AVB)是经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)患者的常见并发症。右心尖部心室起搏(RVP)是标准治疗方法,但长期可能会导致心肌病。左束支区域起搏(LBBAP)是一种有前途的替代方法,可最大程度地减少失同步的风险。然而,TAVI 后 LBBAP 的可用证据仍然较少。

目的

评估 TAVI 后 AVB 时 LBBAP 与 RVP 的可行性和安全性。

方法

2022 年 1 月 1 日至 2022 年 12 月 31 日,在三家大容量医院连续纳入 TAVI 后早期发生 AVB 的患者,并接受 LBBAP 或 RVP 治疗。收集了手术过程和短期随访(至少 3 个月)的数据。

结果

共纳入 38 例患者(61%为男性,平均年龄 83±6 岁);20 例(53%)患者接受 LBBAP。根据选择的起搏策略,所有患者均获得了手术成功。根据所选起搏方式,植入时和平均随访 4.2±2.8 个月后的电起搏性能在临床方面是等效的。在 LBBAP 组中,手术时间较长(70±17 分钟比 RVP 组的 58±15 分钟,P=0.02),起搏 QRS 波较窄(植入时 120±19 毫秒比 RVP 组的 155±12 毫秒,P<0.001;随访时 119±18 毫秒比 RVP 组的 157±9 毫秒,P<0.001)。两组的并发症发生率无差异。

结论

在 TAVI 后发生 AVB 的患者中,LBBAP 是可行且安全的,与 RVP 相比,可导致急性和随访期间 QRS 波持续时间变窄。需要进一步研究以评估在这种临床情况下 LBBAP 是否会减少起搏引起的心肌病。

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