Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing versus Right Ventricular Pacing in Patients with Atrioventricular Block: An Observational Cohort Study.

IF 3.4 4区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Zhongxiu Chen, Yuanning Xu, Lingyun Jiang, Ran Zhang, Hongsen Zhao, Ran Liu, Lei Zhang, Yajiao Li, Xingbin Liu
{"title":"Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing versus Right Ventricular Pacing in Patients with Atrioventricular Block: An Observational Cohort Study.","authors":"Zhongxiu Chen, Yuanning Xu, Lingyun Jiang, Ran Zhang, Hongsen Zhao, Ran Liu, Lei Zhang, Yajiao Li, Xingbin Liu","doi":"10.1155/2023/6659048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective We aim to conduct a comparison of the safety and effectiveness performance between left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) and right ventricular pacing (RVP) regimens for patients with atrioventricular block (AVB). Methods This observational cohort study included patients who underwent pacemaker implantations with LBBAP or RVP for AVB indications from the 1st of January 2018 to the 18th of November 2021 at West China Hospital. The primary composite outcome included all-cause mortality, lead failure, or heart failure hospitalization (HFH). The secondary outcome included periprocedure complication, cardiac death, or recurrent unexplained syncope. A 1 : 1 propensity score–matched cohort was conducted for left ventricular (LV) function analysis. Results A total of 903 patients met the inclusion criteria and completed clinical follow-up. After adjusting for the possible confounders, LBBAP was independently associated with a lower risk of the primary outcome (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.83, p = 0.009), including a lower risk of all-cause mortality and HFH. No significant difference in the secondary outcome was detected between the groups except that LBBAP was independently associated with a lower risk of recurrent unexplained syncope. In the propensity-score matching cohort of echocardiographic analysis, the LV systolic dyssynchrony index was lower in LBBAP compared with that in RVP (5.68 ± 1.92 vs. 6.50 ± 2.28%, p = 0.012). Conclusions Compared to conventional RVP, LBBAP is a feasible novel pacing model associated with a significant reduction in the primary composite outcome. Moreover, LBBAP significantly reduces the risk of recurrent unexplained syncope and improves LV systolic synchrony. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05722379.","PeriodicalId":9582,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Therapeutics","volume":"2023 ","pages":"6659048"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10462439/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/6659048","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective We aim to conduct a comparison of the safety and effectiveness performance between left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) and right ventricular pacing (RVP) regimens for patients with atrioventricular block (AVB). Methods This observational cohort study included patients who underwent pacemaker implantations with LBBAP or RVP for AVB indications from the 1st of January 2018 to the 18th of November 2021 at West China Hospital. The primary composite outcome included all-cause mortality, lead failure, or heart failure hospitalization (HFH). The secondary outcome included periprocedure complication, cardiac death, or recurrent unexplained syncope. A 1 : 1 propensity score–matched cohort was conducted for left ventricular (LV) function analysis. Results A total of 903 patients met the inclusion criteria and completed clinical follow-up. After adjusting for the possible confounders, LBBAP was independently associated with a lower risk of the primary outcome (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.83, p = 0.009), including a lower risk of all-cause mortality and HFH. No significant difference in the secondary outcome was detected between the groups except that LBBAP was independently associated with a lower risk of recurrent unexplained syncope. In the propensity-score matching cohort of echocardiographic analysis, the LV systolic dyssynchrony index was lower in LBBAP compared with that in RVP (5.68 ± 1.92 vs. 6.50 ± 2.28%, p = 0.012). Conclusions Compared to conventional RVP, LBBAP is a feasible novel pacing model associated with a significant reduction in the primary composite outcome. Moreover, LBBAP significantly reduces the risk of recurrent unexplained syncope and improves LV systolic synchrony. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05722379.

Abstract Image

房室传导阻滞患者左束分支区起搏与右心室起搏:一项观察性队列研究。
目的:比较左束分支区起搏(LBBAP)和右心室起搏(RVP)治疗房室传导阻滞(AVB)患者的安全性和有效性。方法:本观察性队列研究纳入2018年1月1日至2021年11月18日在华西医院接受LBBAP或RVP起搏器植入治疗AVB指征的患者。主要综合结局包括全因死亡率、导联衰竭或心力衰竭住院(HFH)。次要结局包括围手术期并发症、心源性死亡或复发性不明原因晕厥。采用1:1倾向评分匹配队列进行左室功能分析。结果:903例患者符合纳入标准,完成临床随访。在调整了可能的混杂因素后,LBBAP与主要结局的较低风险独立相关(OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.28至0.83,p = 0.009),包括全因死亡率和HFH的较低风险。除了LBBAP与复发不明原因晕厥的风险较低独立相关外,两组间的次要结局无显著差异。在超声心动图分析的倾向评分匹配队列中,LBBAP组左室收缩非同步化指数低于RVP组(5.68±1.92∶6.50±2.28%,p = 0.012)。结论:与常规RVP相比,LBBAP是一种可行的新型起搏模型,其主要综合预后显著降低。此外,LBBAP可显著降低复发不明原因晕厥的风险,改善左室收缩同步。该研究已在ClinicalTrials.gov注册NCT05722379。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cardiovascular Therapeutics
Cardiovascular Therapeutics 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Cardiovascular Therapeutics (formerly Cardiovascular Drug Reviews) is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research and review articles focusing on cardiovascular and clinical pharmacology, as well as clinical trials of new cardiovascular therapies. Articles on translational research, pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine, device, gene and cell therapies, and pharmacoepidemiology are also encouraged. Subject areas include (but are by no means limited to): Acute coronary syndrome Arrhythmias Atherosclerosis Basic cardiac electrophysiology Cardiac catheterization Cardiac remodeling Coagulation and thrombosis Diabetic cardiovascular disease Heart failure (systolic HF, HFrEF, diastolic HF, HFpEF) Hyperlipidemia Hypertension Ischemic heart disease Vascular biology Ventricular assist devices Molecular cardio-biology Myocardial regeneration Lipoprotein metabolism Radial artery access Percutaneous coronary intervention Transcatheter aortic and mitral valve replacement.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信