Conduction System Stimulation to Avoid Left Ventricle Dysfunction.

IF 9.1 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Carlos E González-Matos, Oriol Rodríguez-Queralto, Fátima Záraket, Jesús Jiménez, Benjamín Casteigt, Ermengol Vallès
{"title":"Conduction System Stimulation to Avoid Left Ventricle Dysfunction.","authors":"Carlos E González-Matos, Oriol Rodríguez-Queralto, Fátima Záraket, Jesús Jiménez, Benjamín Casteigt, Ermengol Vallès","doi":"10.1161/CIRCEP.123.012473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP) can produce left ventricle dysfunction. Conduction system pacing (CSP) has been used successfully to reverse left ventricle dysfunction in patients with left bundle branch block. To date, data about CSP prevention of left ventricle dysfunction in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are scarce and limited mostly to nonrandomized studies. Our aim is to demonstrate that CSP can preserve normal ventricular function compared with RVAP in the setting of a high burden of ventricular pacing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Consecutive patients with a high-degree atrioventricular block and preserved or mildly deteriorated LVEF (>40%) were included in this prospective, randomized, parallel, controlled study, comparing conventional RVAP versus CSP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-five patients were randomized, with no differences between basal characteristics in both groups. The stimulated QRS duration was significantly longer in the RVAP group compared with the CSP group (160.4±18.1 versus 124.2±20.2 ms; <i>p</i><0.01). Seventy patients were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. LVEF showed a significant decrease in the RVAP group at 6 months compared with the CSP group (mean difference, -5.8% [95% CI, -9.6% to -2%]; <i>P</i><0.01). Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter showed an increase in the RVAP group compared with the CSP group (mean difference, 3.2 [95% CI, 0.1-6.2] mm; <i>P</i>=0.04). Heart failure-related admissions were higher in the RVAP group (22.6% versus 5.1%; <i>P</i>=0.03).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Conduction system stimulation prevents LVEF deterioration and heart failure-related admissions in patients with normal or mildly deteriorated LVEF requiring a high burden of ventricular pacing. These results are only short term and need to be confirmed by further larger studies.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT06026683.</p>","PeriodicalId":10319,"journal":{"name":"Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology","volume":" ","pages":"e012473"},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.123.012473","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP) can produce left ventricle dysfunction. Conduction system pacing (CSP) has been used successfully to reverse left ventricle dysfunction in patients with left bundle branch block. To date, data about CSP prevention of left ventricle dysfunction in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are scarce and limited mostly to nonrandomized studies. Our aim is to demonstrate that CSP can preserve normal ventricular function compared with RVAP in the setting of a high burden of ventricular pacing.

Methods: Consecutive patients with a high-degree atrioventricular block and preserved or mildly deteriorated LVEF (>40%) were included in this prospective, randomized, parallel, controlled study, comparing conventional RVAP versus CSP.

Results: Seventy-five patients were randomized, with no differences between basal characteristics in both groups. The stimulated QRS duration was significantly longer in the RVAP group compared with the CSP group (160.4±18.1 versus 124.2±20.2 ms; p<0.01). Seventy patients were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. LVEF showed a significant decrease in the RVAP group at 6 months compared with the CSP group (mean difference, -5.8% [95% CI, -9.6% to -2%]; P<0.01). Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter showed an increase in the RVAP group compared with the CSP group (mean difference, 3.2 [95% CI, 0.1-6.2] mm; P=0.04). Heart failure-related admissions were higher in the RVAP group (22.6% versus 5.1%; P=0.03).

Conclusions: Conduction system stimulation prevents LVEF deterioration and heart failure-related admissions in patients with normal or mildly deteriorated LVEF requiring a high burden of ventricular pacing. These results are only short term and need to be confirmed by further larger studies.

Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT06026683.

刺激传导系统以避免左心室功能障碍
背景:右室心尖起搏(RVAP)会导致左室功能障碍。传导系统起搏(CSP)已成功用于逆转左束支传导阻滞患者的左室功能障碍。迄今为止,有关 CSP 预防左心室射血分数(LVEF)保留患者左心室功能障碍的数据很少,而且大多局限于非随机研究。我们的目的是证明,与 RVAP 相比,在心室起搏负担较重的情况下,CSP 可以保持正常的心室功能:这项前瞻性、随机、平行对照研究纳入了高度房室传导阻滞和 LVEF 保留或轻度恶化(>40%)的连续患者,比较了传统 RVAP 与 CSP:75名患者接受了随机治疗,两组患者的基础特征无差异。与 CSP 组相比,RVAP 组的刺激 QRS 持续时间明显更长(160.4±18.1 对 124.2±20.2 ms;PPP=0.04)。RVAP组心衰相关入院率更高(22.6%对5.1%;P=0.03):结论:对于 LVEF 正常或轻度恶化、需要大量心室起搏的患者,刺激传导系统可防止 LVEF 恶化和心衰相关入院。这些结果只是短期的,需要进一步的大型研究来证实:URL:https://www.clinicaltrials.gov;唯一标识符:NCT06026683。
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
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
187
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology is a journal dedicated to the study and application of clinical cardiac electrophysiology. It covers a wide range of topics including the diagnosis and treatment of cardiac arrhythmias, as well as research in this field. The journal accepts various types of studies, including observational research, clinical trials, epidemiological studies, and advancements in translational research.
×
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