Relationship of different left bundle branch pacing sites and clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure.

IF 8.3 2区 材料科学 Q1 MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Wen Liu, Zibire Fulati, Fangyan Tian, Nuo Xu, Yufei Cheng, Yingjie Zhao, Haiyan Chen, Xianhong Shu
{"title":"Relationship of different left bundle branch pacing sites and clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure.","authors":"Wen Liu, Zibire Fulati, Fangyan Tian, Nuo Xu, Yufei Cheng, Yingjie Zhao, Haiyan Chen, Xianhong Shu","doi":"10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.08.059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a novel physiological pacing modality. However, whether it delivers comparable efficacy with different capture sites in patients with heart failure remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to assess the association between different pacing sites and the response of LBBP.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-three consecutive patients with heart failure, referred for successful LBBP implantation, were prospectively recruited in this study. Patients were assigned to 3 subgroups according to the paced QRS complex morphology (left bundle branch trunk pacing [LBTP], left posterior fascicular pacing, or left anterior fascicular pacing groups). Echocardiograms and electrocardiograms were recorded and analyzed at baseline and 6-month follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The response rate was 95.0%, 88.2%, and 83.3% in LBTP, left posterior fascicular pacing, and left anterior fascicular pacing groups, respectively. All subgroups were efficient in narrowing the QRS complex (QRS complex narrowing: 38.1 ± 10.8 ms, 36.4 ± 12.6 ms, and 40.8 ± 10.8 ms) and improving cardiac function (LVEF improvement: 25.7% ± 8.1%, 15.3% ± 8.1%, and 18.8% ± 4.4%). Compared with left fascicular pacing, LBTP resulted in longer peak left ventricular activation time (76.5 ± 10.2 ms vs 82.3 ± 6.5 ms; P = .037) and shorter duration from intrinsicoid deflection in V1 or V2 to QRS end (128.0 ± 6.0 ms vs 113.3 ± 5.2 ms; P<.0001), along with better improvement in septal systolic longitudinal strain (P = .007) and lateral-septal myocardial loading inhomogeneity (P = .036). Linear regression analysis further revealed that left bundle branch capture sites were strongly associated with the improvement in peak strain dispersion (model R<sup>2</sup> = 0.586; P = .042) and LVEF (model R<sup>2</sup> = 0.425; P < .0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Different left bundle branch capture sites led to a subtle difference in mechanical synchrony, which may, in turn, affect LVEF improvement in patients with heart failure.</p>","PeriodicalId":5,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.08.059","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a novel physiological pacing modality. However, whether it delivers comparable efficacy with different capture sites in patients with heart failure remains unclear.

Objective: This study aimed to assess the association between different pacing sites and the response of LBBP.

Methods: Forty-three consecutive patients with heart failure, referred for successful LBBP implantation, were prospectively recruited in this study. Patients were assigned to 3 subgroups according to the paced QRS complex morphology (left bundle branch trunk pacing [LBTP], left posterior fascicular pacing, or left anterior fascicular pacing groups). Echocardiograms and electrocardiograms were recorded and analyzed at baseline and 6-month follow-up.

Results: The response rate was 95.0%, 88.2%, and 83.3% in LBTP, left posterior fascicular pacing, and left anterior fascicular pacing groups, respectively. All subgroups were efficient in narrowing the QRS complex (QRS complex narrowing: 38.1 ± 10.8 ms, 36.4 ± 12.6 ms, and 40.8 ± 10.8 ms) and improving cardiac function (LVEF improvement: 25.7% ± 8.1%, 15.3% ± 8.1%, and 18.8% ± 4.4%). Compared with left fascicular pacing, LBTP resulted in longer peak left ventricular activation time (76.5 ± 10.2 ms vs 82.3 ± 6.5 ms; P = .037) and shorter duration from intrinsicoid deflection in V1 or V2 to QRS end (128.0 ± 6.0 ms vs 113.3 ± 5.2 ms; P<.0001), along with better improvement in septal systolic longitudinal strain (P = .007) and lateral-septal myocardial loading inhomogeneity (P = .036). Linear regression analysis further revealed that left bundle branch capture sites were strongly associated with the improvement in peak strain dispersion (model R2 = 0.586; P = .042) and LVEF (model R2 = 0.425; P < .0001).

Conclusion: Different left bundle branch capture sites led to a subtle difference in mechanical synchrony, which may, in turn, affect LVEF improvement in patients with heart failure.

不同左束支起搏点与心衰患者临床疗效的关系
背景:左束支起搏(LBBP)是一种新型的生理起搏方式。然而,在心力衰竭(HF)患者中,不同的捕获部位是否具有可比疗效仍不清楚:本研究旨在评估不同起搏部位与 LBBP 反应之间的关联:本研究前瞻性地招募了43名成功植入LBBP的连续心衰患者。根据起搏QRS波群形态将患者分为3个亚组(左束支干起搏组(LBTP)、左后筋膜起搏组(LPFP)或左前筋膜起搏组(LAFP))。记录并分析了基线和6个月随访时的超声心动图和心电图:结果:LBTP、LPFP 和 LAFP 组的响应率分别为 95.0%、88.2% 和 83.3%。所有亚组在缩小 QRS 波群(ΔQRS:62.4±10.4 ms、54.7±14.2 ms、58.2±14.5 ms)和改善心功能(ΔLVEF:25.7±8.1%、15.3±8.1%、18.8±4.4%)方面均有效。与左束起搏(LFP)相比,LBTP 使 LVAT 更长(76.5±10.2ms vs 82.3±6.5ms;P=0.037),QRSid 更短(128.0±6.0ms vs 113.3±5.2ms;P<0.0001),室间隔收缩期纵向应变(P=0.007)和侧隔心肌负荷不均匀性(P=0.036)得到更好的改善。线性回归分析进一步显示,LBB捕获部位与峰值应变弥散(PSD)(模型R2=0.586,P=0.042)和LVEF(模型R2=0.425,P 结论)的改善密切相关:不同的 LBB 捕获部位会导致机械同步性的细微差别,进而影响心房颤动患者 LVEF 的改善。
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
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 工程技术-材料科学:综合
CiteScore
16.00
自引率
6.30%
发文量
4978
审稿时长
1.8 months
期刊介绍: ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces is a leading interdisciplinary journal that brings together chemists, engineers, physicists, and biologists to explore the development and utilization of newly-discovered materials and interfacial processes for specific applications. Our journal has experienced remarkable growth since its establishment in 2009, both in terms of the number of articles published and the impact of the research showcased. We are proud to foster a truly global community, with the majority of published articles originating from outside the United States, reflecting the rapid growth of applied research worldwide.
×
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