Suppr超能文献

左束支阻滞中的逆向传导:左束支起搏的启示。

Retrograde Conduction in Left Bundle Branch Block: Insights From Left Bundle Branch Pacing.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Velammal Medical College, Madurai, India.

Medtronic India, Mumbai, India.

出版信息

JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2024 Aug;10(8):1885-1895. doi: 10.1016/j.jacep.2024.04.004. Epub 2024 Jun 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Biventricular pacing is a well-established therapy for patients with heart failure (HF), left bundle branch block (LBBB) and left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) has emerged as an alternative to biventricular pacing.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the retrograde conduction properties of the left bundle branch in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy and LBBB during LBBP and its clinical implications.

METHODS

Patients undergoing successful LBBP for nonischemic cardiomyopathy with LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% and LBBB were included. Continuous recording of His potential was performed using a quadripolar catheter. Unidirectional block was defined as retrograde His bundle activation during LBBP with stimulus to His potential (SH) duration less than or equal to antegrade HV interval and bidirectional block as VH dissociation or SH duration greater than HV interval. HF hospitalization, ventricular arrhythmias, and mortality were documented.

RESULTS

A total of 165 patients were included. The mean follow-up duration was 21.8 ± 13.1 months. Bidirectional block (group I) was observed in 82% (n = 136), and these patients were noted to have advanced HF stage and prolonged baseline QRS duration. Unidirectional block (group II) with intact retrograde conduction was observed in 18% (n = 29) and was associated with narrow paced QRS duration and higher LVEF during follow-up. Super-response (LVEF ≥50%) was observed in 54.4% (n = 74) in group I compared with 73.3% (n = 22) in group II (P = 0.03). The OR for LVEF normalization was 4.1 (95% CI: 1.26-13.97; P = 0.02), with unidirectional block compared with bidirectional block in patients with LBBB and LV dysfunction. Adverse clinical outcomes as measured by a composite of HF hospitalization, ventricular arrhythmias, and mortality were significantly higher in group I compared with group II (12.5% vs 0%; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Bidirectional block in LBBB was characterized by advanced HF symptoms, while unidirectional block was associated with better clinical outcomes after cardiac resynchronization therapy by LBBP.

摘要

背景

双心室起搏是心力衰竭(HF)、左束支传导阻滞(LBBB)和左心室(LV)功能障碍患者的一种成熟治疗方法。左束支起搏(LBBP)已成为双心室起搏的替代方法。

目的

本研究旨在评估非缺血性心肌病伴 LBBB 患者在 LBBP 期间左束支的逆行传导特性及其临床意义。

方法

纳入了因非缺血性心肌病且 LV 射血分数(LVEF)≤35%和 LBBB 而接受成功 LBBP 的患者。使用四极导管连续记录 His 电位。单向阻滞定义为在 LBBP 期间刺激 His 电位(SH)的逆向 His 束激活,SH 持续时间小于或等于前向 HV 间隔,双向阻滞定义为 VH 分离或 SH 持续时间大于 HV 间隔。记录 HF 住院、室性心律失常和死亡率。

结果

共纳入 165 例患者。平均随访时间为 21.8±13.1 个月。观察到 82%(n=136)存在双向阻滞(I 组),这些患者存在晚期 HF 阶段和延长的基线 QRS 持续时间。观察到 18%(n=29)存在完整逆行传导的单向阻滞(II 组),其特点是起搏 QRS 持续时间变窄和随访时 LVEF 更高。I 组中 54.4%(n=74)观察到超反应(LVEF≥50%),而 II 组中 73.3%(n=22)观察到超反应(P=0.03)。与双向阻滞相比,LBBB 和 LV 功能障碍患者中存在单向阻滞的 LVEF 正常化的 OR 为 4.1(95%CI:1.26-13.97;P=0.02)。与 II 组相比,I 组的 HF 住院、室性心律失常和死亡率综合的不良临床结局显著更高(12.5%vs 0%;P=0.04)。

结论

LBBB 中的双向阻滞以晚期 HF 症状为特征,而单向阻滞与 LBBP 后心脏再同步治疗的更好临床结局相关。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验