{"title":"用无创压力-容量环路评价左束支区起搏时的心脏能量学","authors":"Naoya Inoue MD , Shuji Morikawa MD , Yuji Ito MD , Yohei Takayama MD , Takehiro Hiramatsu MD , Ryo Ohinata MD , Daiki Okamoto MD , Toyoaki Murohara MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.hroo.2025.03.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Conduction system pacing, particularly left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), is emerging as the preferred strategy for bradyarrhythmias and cardiac resynchronization therapy because of its clinical benefits. However, the differences in the impact of LBBAP vs right ventricular pacing (RVP) on cardiac energetics remain unclear.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of LBBAP and RVP on cardiac energetics using a novel noninvasive pressure–volume (PV) loop algorithm derived from cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We included patients who underwent permanent pacemaker implantation with LBBAP or RVP between January 2021 and October 2024, followed by CMR imaging. Noninvasive PV loops were calculated using volumes derived from CMR and a time-varying elastance model. The parameters obtained from the PV loop analysis were compared between the LBBAP and RVP groups. Sensitivity analyses were performed by varying the left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (3–40 mm Hg) and excluding anodal pacing cases.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 235 patients, 15 were analyzed (LBBAP group, n = 7; RVP group, n = 8). The end-systolic PV relationship was significantly higher in the LBBAP group (2.25 mm Hg/mL [1.85–2.55]) compared to the RVP group (1.39 mm Hg/mL [1.33–1.69]; <em>P</em> <.0001). The potential energy and PV area were significantly lower in the LBBAP group (<em>P</em> = .0006 and <em>P</em> = .006, respectively), whereas the ventricular efficiency was significantly higher (63.1% vs 57.4%; <em>P</em> = .006).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>LBBAP reduces myocardial energy consumption and improves ventricular efficiency compared with RVP, suggesting its advantages in pacing-associated cardiac energetics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":29772,"journal":{"name":"Heart Rhythm O2","volume":"6 6","pages":"Pages 789-798"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of cardiac energetics in left bundle branch area pacing using noninvasive pressure–volume loops\",\"authors\":\"Naoya Inoue MD , Shuji Morikawa MD , Yuji Ito MD , Yohei Takayama MD , Takehiro Hiramatsu MD , Ryo Ohinata MD , Daiki Okamoto MD , Toyoaki Murohara MD, PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hroo.2025.03.015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Conduction system pacing, particularly left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), is emerging as the preferred strategy for bradyarrhythmias and cardiac resynchronization therapy because of its clinical benefits. However, the differences in the impact of LBBAP vs right ventricular pacing (RVP) on cardiac energetics remain unclear.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of LBBAP and RVP on cardiac energetics using a novel noninvasive pressure–volume (PV) loop algorithm derived from cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We included patients who underwent permanent pacemaker implantation with LBBAP or RVP between January 2021 and October 2024, followed by CMR imaging. Noninvasive PV loops were calculated using volumes derived from CMR and a time-varying elastance model. The parameters obtained from the PV loop analysis were compared between the LBBAP and RVP groups. Sensitivity analyses were performed by varying the left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (3–40 mm Hg) and excluding anodal pacing cases.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 235 patients, 15 were analyzed (LBBAP group, n = 7; RVP group, n = 8). The end-systolic PV relationship was significantly higher in the LBBAP group (2.25 mm Hg/mL [1.85–2.55]) compared to the RVP group (1.39 mm Hg/mL [1.33–1.69]; <em>P</em> <.0001). The potential energy and PV area were significantly lower in the LBBAP group (<em>P</em> = .0006 and <em>P</em> = .006, respectively), whereas the ventricular efficiency was significantly higher (63.1% vs 57.4%; <em>P</em> = .006).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>LBBAP reduces myocardial energy consumption and improves ventricular efficiency compared with RVP, suggesting its advantages in pacing-associated cardiac energetics.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":29772,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Heart Rhythm O2\",\"volume\":\"6 6\",\"pages\":\"Pages 789-798\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Heart Rhythm O2\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666501825001011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart Rhythm O2","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666501825001011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
传导系统起搏,特别是左束支区起搏(LBBAP),由于其临床益处,正逐渐成为慢速心律失常和心脏再同步化治疗的首选策略。然而,LBBAP与右心室起搏(RVP)对心脏能量学的影响差异尚不清楚。目的采用基于心脏磁共振(CMR)的新型无创压力-容积(PV)环路算法,比较LBBAP和RVP对心脏能量学的影响。方法我们纳入了2021年1月至2024年10月期间接受LBBAP或RVP永久性起搏器植入的患者,随后进行了CMR成像。利用CMR和时变弹性模型得出的体积计算无创PV回路。比较LBBAP组和RVP组PV环分析得到的参数。通过改变左室舒张末期压(3-40 mm Hg)并排除阳极起搏病例,进行敏感性分析。结果235例患者中,分析15例(LBBAP组,n = 7;RVP组,n = 8)。与RVP组(1.39 mm Hg/mL[1.33-1.69])相比,LBBAP组(2.25 mm Hg/mL[1.85-2.55])的收缩期末期PV关系显著更高;P & lt;。)。LBBAP组的势能和PV面积显著低于LBBAP组(P = 0.0006和P = 0.006),而心室效率显著高于LBBAP组(63.1% vs 57.4%;P = .006)。结论与RVP相比,lbbap可降低心肌能量消耗,提高心室效率,显示其在起搏相关心脏能量学方面的优势。
Evaluation of cardiac energetics in left bundle branch area pacing using noninvasive pressure–volume loops
Background
Conduction system pacing, particularly left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), is emerging as the preferred strategy for bradyarrhythmias and cardiac resynchronization therapy because of its clinical benefits. However, the differences in the impact of LBBAP vs right ventricular pacing (RVP) on cardiac energetics remain unclear.
Objective
The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of LBBAP and RVP on cardiac energetics using a novel noninvasive pressure–volume (PV) loop algorithm derived from cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR).
Methods
We included patients who underwent permanent pacemaker implantation with LBBAP or RVP between January 2021 and October 2024, followed by CMR imaging. Noninvasive PV loops were calculated using volumes derived from CMR and a time-varying elastance model. The parameters obtained from the PV loop analysis were compared between the LBBAP and RVP groups. Sensitivity analyses were performed by varying the left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (3–40 mm Hg) and excluding anodal pacing cases.
Results
Of the 235 patients, 15 were analyzed (LBBAP group, n = 7; RVP group, n = 8). The end-systolic PV relationship was significantly higher in the LBBAP group (2.25 mm Hg/mL [1.85–2.55]) compared to the RVP group (1.39 mm Hg/mL [1.33–1.69]; P <.0001). The potential energy and PV area were significantly lower in the LBBAP group (P = .0006 and P = .006, respectively), whereas the ventricular efficiency was significantly higher (63.1% vs 57.4%; P = .006).
Conclusion
LBBAP reduces myocardial energy consumption and improves ventricular efficiency compared with RVP, suggesting its advantages in pacing-associated cardiac energetics.