Clinical significance and prognostic value of right bundle branch block in permanent pacemaker patients.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-28 DOI:10.2459/JCM.0000000000001641
Andrea Mazza, Maria Grazia Bendini, Massimo Leggio, Jacopo F Imberti, Sergio Valsecchi, Giuseppe Boriani
{"title":"Clinical significance and prognostic value of right bundle branch block in permanent pacemaker patients.","authors":"Andrea Mazza, Maria Grazia Bendini, Massimo Leggio, Jacopo F Imberti, Sergio Valsecchi, Giuseppe Boriani","doi":"10.2459/JCM.0000000000001641","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>In patients undergoing pacemaker implantation with no prior history of heart failure (HF), the presence of left bundle branch block (LBBB) has been identified as an independent predictor of HF-related death or hospitalization, while the prognostic significance of right bundle branch block (RBBB) remains uncertain. We aimed to assess the long-term risk of all-cause mortality in patients with a standard indication for permanent pacing and normal or moderately depressed left ventricular function when RBBB is detected at the time of implantation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively enrolled 1348 consecutive patients who had undergone single- or dual-chamber pacemaker implantation at the study center, from January 1990 to December 2022. Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% or a prior diagnosis of HF were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The baseline 12-lead electrocardiogram revealed an RBBB in 241 (18%) and an LBBB in 98 (7%) patients. During a median follow-up of 65 [25th-75th percentile: 32-117] months, 704 (52%) patients died. The combined endpoint of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization was reached by 173 (13%) patients. On multivariate analysis, RBBB was confirmed as an independent predictor of death [hazard ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.09-1.63; P  = 0.005]. However, when considering the combined endpoint of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization, this endpoint was independently associated with LBBB (hazard ratio, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.38-3.29; P  < 0.001), but not with RBBB.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients with standard pacemaker indications and normal or moderately depressed left ventricular function, the presence of basal RBBB was an independent predictor of mortality. However, it was not associated with the combined endpoint of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization.</p>","PeriodicalId":15228,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"551-558"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2459/JCM.0000000000001641","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: In patients undergoing pacemaker implantation with no prior history of heart failure (HF), the presence of left bundle branch block (LBBB) has been identified as an independent predictor of HF-related death or hospitalization, while the prognostic significance of right bundle branch block (RBBB) remains uncertain. We aimed to assess the long-term risk of all-cause mortality in patients with a standard indication for permanent pacing and normal or moderately depressed left ventricular function when RBBB is detected at the time of implantation.

Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 1348 consecutive patients who had undergone single- or dual-chamber pacemaker implantation at the study center, from January 1990 to December 2022. Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% or a prior diagnosis of HF were excluded.

Results: The baseline 12-lead electrocardiogram revealed an RBBB in 241 (18%) and an LBBB in 98 (7%) patients. During a median follow-up of 65 [25th-75th percentile: 32-117] months, 704 (52%) patients died. The combined endpoint of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization was reached by 173 (13%) patients. On multivariate analysis, RBBB was confirmed as an independent predictor of death [hazard ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.09-1.63; P  = 0.005]. However, when considering the combined endpoint of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization, this endpoint was independently associated with LBBB (hazard ratio, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.38-3.29; P  < 0.001), but not with RBBB.

Conclusion: In patients with standard pacemaker indications and normal or moderately depressed left ventricular function, the presence of basal RBBB was an independent predictor of mortality. However, it was not associated with the combined endpoint of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization.

永久起搏器患者右束支传导阻滞的临床意义和预后价值。
目的:在既往无心力衰竭(HF)病史的起搏器植入患者中,左束支传导阻滞(LBBB)的存在已被确定为HF相关死亡或住院的独立预测因素,而右束支传导阻滞(RBBB)的预后意义仍不确定。我们的目的是评估具有永久起搏标准适应症、左室功能正常或中度受损且在植入时检测到 RBBB 的患者全因死亡的长期风险:我们回顾性招募了1990年1月至2022年12月期间在研究中心接受单腔或双腔起搏器植入术的1348名连续患者。左室射血分数≤35%或之前诊断为心房颤动的患者被排除在外:基线12导联心电图显示,241名患者(18%)为RBBB,98名患者(7%)为LBBB。在中位随访65个月[第25-75百分位数:32-117]期间,704名(52%)患者死亡。173名(13%)患者达到了心血管死亡或心房颤动住院的综合终点。多变量分析证实,RBBB 是死亡的独立预测因素[危险比为 1.33;95% 置信区间 (CI),1.09-1.63;P = 0.005]。然而,当考虑心血管死亡和心房颤动住院的综合终点时,该终点与 LBBB 独立相关(危险比为 2.13;95% CI 为 1.38-3.29;P = 0.005):在具有标准起搏器适应症且左心室功能正常或中度减退的患者中,基础 RBBB 的存在是预测死亡率的一个独立因素。但是,它与心血管死亡和心房颤动住院的综合终点无关。
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
Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine
Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
26.70%
发文量
189
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine is a monthly publication of the Italian Federation of Cardiology. It publishes original research articles, epidemiological studies, new methodological clinical approaches, case reports, design and goals of clinical trials, review articles, points of view, editorials and Images in cardiovascular medicine. Submitted articles undergo a preliminary review by the editor. Some articles may be returned to authors without further consideration. Those being considered for publication will undergo further assessment and peer-review by the editors and those invited to do so from a reviewer pool. ​
×
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