RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Initial data suggest that His Bundle Pacing (HBP) could preserve long-term cardiac structure and function better than Right Ventricular Pacing (RVP), but evidence is limited. METHODS: We studied consecutive patients with baseline ejection fraction (EF) ≥ 50% who underwent HBP attempt, either successful (HBP group) or failed (RVP group). Two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) echocardiography were carried out at baseline and after 6 months of ventricular pacing burden > 20%. RESULTS: Among 68 patients, 40 underwent successful HBP, and 28 RVP. The HBP and RVP groups did not differ for age, sex and pacing indication. At baseline, the HBP and RVP groups did not differ for 2D EF (62% vs. 62%), 3D EF (60% vs. 63%), 2D (-19% vs. -19%) and 3D global longitudinal strain (GLS) (-15% vs. -16%). After 6 months, 2D EF (-3.86%) and 3D EF (-5.71%) significantly decreased in the RVP group and did not change in the HBP group (p for interaction .006 and <.001, respectively). 2D GLS (3.08%) and 3D GLS (2.22%) significantly increased in the RVP group, but did not change in the HBP group (p for interaction .013 and <.016, respectively). Pacing induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) (EF drop ≥ 10% and EF < 50%) occurred in 14% (RVP) versus 0% (HBP) of patients (p = .025). CONCLUSIONS: Successful HBP was superior to RVP in preserving LV systolic function despite a high ventricular pacing burden, and was less frequently associated with PICM.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as an alternative therapy to traditional right ventricular (RV) pacing. However, the majority of CSP studies reflect small cohorts or single-center experience. OBJECTIVE: This analysis compared CSP to dual-chamber (DC) RV pacing in a large, population-based cohort utilizing data from the Micra Coverage with Evidence Development (CED) study. METHODS: Medicare administrative claims data were used to identify patients implanted with a DC RV pacemaker. Lead placement data from Medtronic's device registration system identified patients treated with CSP (N=6,197) using a 3830 catheter-delivered lead or DC RV (non-3830 lead, non-CSP placement) (N=16,989) at the same centers. CSP patients were stratified into left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) (N=4,738) and His-bundle pacing (HBP) (N=1,459). Incident heart failure hospitalizations (iHFH), all-cause mortality, complication rates and reinterventions at 6 months were analyzed. RESULTS: CSP patients with a 3830 catheter-delivered lead experienced significantly lower rates of iHFH (HR: 0.70, P=0.02) and all-cause mortality at 6 months compared with DC RV patients (HR: 0.66, P<.0001). There was no difference in chronic complications (HR: 0.97, P=0.62) or need for reintervention (HR: 0.95, P=0.63) with CSP compared to DC RV, though LBBAP patients experienced significantly lower rates of complications (HR: 0.71, P=0.001) compared to HBP. CONCLUSION: Dual-chamber pacemaker patients treated with CSP using a 3830 catheter-delivered lead experienced significant all-cause mortality and HFH benefits compared to DC RV pacing. LBBAP had lower complications compared to HBP. These real-world results align with findings in small clinical studies demonstrating the benefits of CSP.

RESUMEN

Background: Conduction abnormality post-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains clinically significant and usually requires chronic pacing. The effect of right ventricular (RV) pacing post-TAVI on clinical outcomes warrants further studies. Methods: We identified 147 consecutive patients who required chronic RV pacing after a successful TAVI procedure and propensity-matched these patients according to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score to a control group of patients that did not require RV pacing post-TAVI. We evaluated routine echocardiographic measurements and performed offline speckle-tracking strain analysis for the purpose of this study on transthoracic echocardiographic (TTE) images performed at 9 to 18 months post-TAVI. Results: The final study population comprised 294 patients (pacing group n = 147 and non-pacing group n = 147), with a mean age of 81 ± 7 years, 59% male; median follow-up was 354 days. There were more baseline conduction abnormalities in the pacing group compared to the non-pacing group (56.5% vs. 41.5%. p = 0.01). Eighty-eight patients (61.6%) in the pacing group required RV pacing due to atrioventricular (AV) conduction block post-TAVI. The mean RV pacing burden was 44% in the pacing group. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was similar at follow-up in the pacing vs. non-pacing groups (57 ± 13.0%, 59 ± 11% p = 0.31); however, LV global longitudinal strain (-12.7 ± 3.5% vs. -18.8 ± 2.7%, p < 0.0001), LV apical strain (-12.9 ± 5.5% vs. 23.2 ± 9.2%, p < 0.0001), and mid-LV strain (-12.7 ± 4.6% vs. -18.7 ± 3.4%, p < 0.0001) were significantly worse in the pacing vs. non-pacing groups. Conclusions: Chronic RV pacing after the TAVI procedure is associated with subclinical LV systolic dysfunction within 1.5 years of follow-up.

RESUMEN

Background: There is limited research on the intra-individual efficacy of ventricular pacing minimization algorithms developed by Biotronik-the Ventricular Pace Suppression algorithm (VpS) and the Intrinsic Rhythm Support plus algorithm (IRSplus) (BIOTRONIK SE & Co. KG, Berlin, Germany). We performed a randomized pilot trial that evaluated the efficacy of two algorithms in patients with symptomatic sinus node dysfunction (SND) who received a dual-chamber pacemaker. Methods: The trial was conducted in 11 tertiary hospitals in South Korea. The patients were randomized to either the VpS or IRSplus algorithm group after a 3-month period of fixed atrioventricular (AV) delay. The primary outcome was the ventricular pacing percentage (Vp%) at each follow-up visit. The secondary outcomes were the occurrence of heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) during the study period. Results: Data from 131 patients were analyzed. Initially, their average Vp% over 3 months with a fixed AV interval was 14.1 ± 19.4%. Patients were randomly assigned to VpS and IRSplus groups, with 66 and 65 in each. Algorithms reduced average Vp% to 4.0 ± 11.3% at 9 months and 6.7 ± 14.9% at 15 months. These algorithms were more effective for patients with paced AV delay (PAVD) ≤300 ms compared to those with PAVD >300 ms. Both algorithms were equally effective in reducing Vp%. Clinical AF or HF hospitalization was not observed during the study period. Conclusion: The VpS and IRSplus algorithms are effective and safe in minimizing unnecessary ventricular pacing in patients with SND.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is safe and effective, but studies in older patients are lacking. This study compared the clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of LBBAP and right ventricular pacing (RVP) in patients aged ≥75 years. METHODS: This prospective observational study included older patients with symptomatic bradycardia who underwent LBBAP or RVP between 2019 and 2022. Clinical data, including pacing and electrophysiological characteristics, echocardiographic measurements, and device-related complications were collected. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and upgrade to biventricular pacing. Secondary outcomes included changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). RESULTS: Of 267 included patients, 110 underwent LBBAP and 157 underwent RVP. LBBAP was successful in 109 patients (success rate: 99.1%), with one patient eventually undergoing RVP. The pacing parameters of LBBAP were similar to those of RVP, except for a significantly narrower paced QRS duration (112.8 ± 11.6 vs. 138.3 ± 23.9 ms, p < .001). Ventricular lead implanting procedural duration was longer for LBBAP than RVP (14.0 vs. 6.0 min, p < .001), as was the fluoroscopy time (4.0 vs. 2.0 min, p < .001). During a mean follow-up period of 31.0 ± 16.8 months, the primary outcome incidence was significantly lower following LBBAP than RVP (15.1% vs. 21.1%; hazard ratio, 0.471; 95% confidence interval, 0.215-1.032; p = .036) in 149 patients (55.8%) with ventricular pacing burden > 20%. RVP reduced LVEF from 62.7 ± 4.1% at baseline to 59.8 ± 7.8% at the final follow-up (p = .001), whereas LBBAP preserved LVEF (61.4 ± 6.3% vs. 60.1 ± 7.4%, p = .429). CONCLUSION: LBBAP demonstrated improved clinical outcomes compared with RVP and maintained LVEF in older patients with high ventricular pacing burdens.

RESUMEN

AIMS: Recommendations on cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter (AF) are based on less robust evidence than those in sinus rhythm (SR). We aimed to assess the efficacy of CRT upgrade in the BUDAPEST-CRT Upgrade trial population by their baseline rhythm. METHODS AND RESULTS: Heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and previously implanted pacemaker (PM) or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and ≥20% right ventricular (RV) pacing burden were randomized to CRT with defibrillator (CRT-D) upgrade (n = 215) or ICD (n = 145). Primary [HF hospitalization (HFH), all-cause mortality, or <15% reduction of left ventricular end-systolic volume] and secondary outcomes were investigated. At enrolment, 131 (36%) patients had AF, who had an increased risk for HFH as compared with those with SR [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 2.99; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-7.13; P = 0.013]. The effect of CRT-D upgrade was similar in patients with AF as in those with SR [AF adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.06; 95% CI 0.02-0.17; P < 0.001; SR aOR 0.13; 95% CI 0.07-0.27; P < 0.001; interaction P = 0.29] during the mean follow-up time of 12.4 months. Also, it decreased the risk of HFH or all-cause mortality (aHR 0.33; 95% CI 0.16-0.70; P = 0.003; interaction P = 0.17) and improved the echocardiographic response (left ventricular end-diastolic volume difference -49.21 mL; 95% CI -69.10 to -29.32; P < 0.001; interaction P = 0.21). CONCLUSION: In HFrEF patients with AF and PM/ICD with high RV pacing burden, CRT-D upgrade decreased the risk of HFH and improved reverse remodelling when compared with ICD, similar to that seen in patients in SR.

Asunto(s)

Fibrilación Atrial , Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca , Desfibriladores Implantables , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Volumen Sistólico , Humanos , Fibrilación Atrial/terapia , Fibrilación Atrial/fisiopatología , Fibrilación Atrial/mortalidad , Fibrilación Atrial/complicaciones , Fibrilación Atrial/diagnóstico , Masculino , Femenino , Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca/métodos , Anciano , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/mortalidad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Persona de Mediana Edad , Función Ventricular Derecha , Función Ventricular Izquierda , Dispositivos de Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca , Factores de Riesgo , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Cardioversión Eléctrica/efectos adversos , Cardioversión Eléctrica/instrumentación , Factores de Tiempo , Anciano de 80 o más Años

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Delivery of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) requires left ventricular myocardial capture to achieve clinical benefits. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether ineffective pacing affects survival. METHODS: Ineffective ventricular pacing (VP) was defined as the difference between the percentage of delivered CRT (%VP) and the percentage of EffectivCRT in CRT devices. Using the Optum de-identified electronic health record data set and Medtronic CareLink data warehouse, we identified patients implanted with applicable devices with at least 30 days of follow-up. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models assessed the effect of %VP and % ineffective VP on survival. RESULTS: Among 7987 patients with 2.1 ± 1.0 years of follow-up, increasing ineffective VP was associated with decreasing survival: the highest observed survival was in the quartile with <0.08% ineffective VP and the lowest survival was in the quartile with >1.47% ineffective VP (85.1% vs 75.7% at 3 years; P < .001). As expected, patients with more than the median %VP of 97.7% had better survival than did patients with <97.7% VP (84.2% vs 77.8%; P < .001). However, patients who had >97.7% VP but >2% ineffective VP had similar survival to patients with <97.7% VP but ≤2% ineffective VP (81.6% vs 79.4%; P = .54). A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model demonstrated that <97.7% VP (adjusted hazard ratio 1.29; 95% confidence interval 1.14-1.46; P < .001) and >2% ineffective VP (hazard ratio 1.35; 95% confidence interval 1.18-1.54; P < .001) were both significantly associated with decreased survival. CONCLUSION: Ineffective VP is associated with decreased survival. In addition to maximizing the percentage of delivered CRT pacing, every effort should be made to minimize ineffective VP.

RESUMEN

Flecainide is a class Ic anti-arrhythmic that demonstrates use dependence, meaning the medication has an increased effect on the myocardium at high heart rates. Flecainide toxicity can be identified by wide QRS complexes on an electrocardiogram (ECG). We discuss a case of a 75-year-old patient with a pacemaker who presented with concern for flecainide toxicity. The patient had several risk factors known to increase the likelihood for toxicity, including structural heart disease and acute kidney injury. The initial ECG showed tachycardia with wide QRS complexes. The patient had a pacemaker set in a tracking mode (DDD) that resulted in rapid ventricular pacing with failure to mode switch. However, with modification to the VVI mode, the patient experienced tachycardia resolution with an improvement in QRS complexes. This case emphasizes the use dependence of flecainide and illustrates the utility of pacing mode in the management of flecainide toxicity in patients with pacemakers.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of triglyceride-glucose (TyG) index is not yet known for older diabetic patients received right ventricular pacing (RVP). We aimed to investigate the association between TyG index and the risk of heart failure hospitalization (HFH) in older diabetic patients received RVP. METHODS: This study was conducted between January 2017 and January 2018 at Fuwai Hospital, Beijing, China, and included older (age ≥ 65 years) diabetic patients that received RVP for the first time. TyG index were obtained before implantation. The primary endpoint was HFH. RESULTS: A total of 231 patients were divided into three groups according to the tertiles of TyG index: < 8.5 (T1, N = 77), 8.5-9.1 (T2, N = 77), and > 9.1 (T3, N = 77). T3 group had higher rate of HFH (Log-rank = 11.7, P = 0.003). Multivariate analyses showed that, TyG index served as an independent predictor for HFH, both as numerical variable (HR = 1.94, 95% CI 1.21-3.11, P = 0.006), and as categorical variable (HR = 2.31, 95% CI 1.09-4.89, P = 0.03). RCS demonstrated that the risk of HFH was relatively low until TyG index exceeded 8.8, beyond which the risk began to increase rapidly (P-non-linear = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Preimplantation TyG index emerges as a robust, independent predictor for HFH in older diabetic patients received RVP, and TyG index > 8.8 might be the optimal cut-off value.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cerebral aneurysms in complex anatomical locations and intraoperative rupture can be challenging. Many methods to reduce blood flow can facilitate its exclusion from the circulation. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of using adenosine, rapid ventricular pacing, and hypothermia in cerebral aneurysm clipping. METHODS: Databases (PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) were systematically searched for studies documenting the use of adenosine, rapid ventricular pacing, and hypothermia in cerebral aneurysm clipping and were included in this single-arm meta-analysis. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included neurological outcomes by mRs and GOS, and cardiac outcomes. We evaluated the risk of bias using ROBIN-I, a tool developed by the Cochrane Collaboration. OpenMetaAnalyst version 2.0 was used for statistical analysis and I2 measured data heterogeneity. Heterogeneity was defined as an I2 > 50%. RESULTS: Our systematic search yielded 10,100 results. After the removal of duplicates and exclusion by title and abstract, 64 studies were considered for full review, of which 29 were included. The overall risk of bias was moderate. The pooled proportions of the adenosine analysis for the different outcomes were: For the primary outcome: 11,9%; for perioperative arrhythmia: 0,19%; for postoperative arrhythmia: 0,56%; for myocardial infarction incidence: 0,01%; for follow-up good recovery (mRs 0-2): 88%; and for neurological deficit:14.1%. In the rapid ventricular pacing analysis, incidences were as follows: peri operative arrhythmia: 0,64%; postoperative arrhythmia: 0,3%; myocardial infarction: 0%. In the hypothermia analysis, the pooled proportion of 30-day mortality was 11,6%. The incidence of post-op neurological deficits was 35,4% and good recovery under neurological analysis by GOS was present in 69.2%. CONCLUSION: The use of the three methods is safe and the related complications were very low. Further studies are necessary, especially with comparative analysis, for extended knowledge.

Asunto(s)

Adenosina , Aneurisma Intracraneal , Humanos , Aneurisma Intracraneal/cirugía , Adenosina/uso terapéutico , Hipotermia Inducida/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Procedimientos Neuroquirúrgicos/métodos , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial/métodos

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) demonstrated beneficial effects on clinical outcomes. Comparative data on the risk of atrial high-rate episodes (AHREs) between LBBAP and right ventricular pacing (RVP) are lacking. AIMS: This study aimed to investigate whether LBBAP can reduce the risk of new-onset AHREs compared with RVP in patients with atrioventricular block (AVB). METHODS: We enrolled 175 consecutive AVB patients with no history of atrial fibrillation undergoing dual-chamber pacemaker implantation (LBBAP or RVP). Propensity score matching for baseline characteristics yielded 43 matched pairs. The primary outcome was new-onset AHREs detected on a scheduled device follow-up. Changes in echocardiographic measurements were also compared between the groups. RESULTS: New-onset AHREs occurred in 42 (24.0%) of all enrolled patients (follow-up 14.1 [7.5] months) and the incidence of new-onset AHREs in the LBBAP group was lower than in the RVP group (19.8% vs. 34.7%; P = 0.04). After propensity score matching, LBBAP still resulted in a lower incidence of new-onset AHREs (11.6% vs. 32.6%; P = 0.02), and a lower hazard ratio for new-onset AHREs compared with RVP (HR, 0.274; 95% CI, 0.113-0.692). At 1 year, LBBAP achieved preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (63.0 [3.2]% to 63.1 [3.1]%; P = 0.56), while RVP resulted in reduced LVEF (63.4 [4.9]% to 60.5 [7.3]%; P = 0.01]). Changes in LVEF were significantly different between the 2 groups (by 2.6% [0.2 to 5.0]%; P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: LBBAP demonstrated a reduced risk of new-onset AHREs compared with RVP in patients with AVB.

Asunto(s)

Bloqueo Atrioventricular , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Bloqueo Atrioventricular/terapia , Anciano , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ventrículos Cardíacos/fisiopatología , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Fibrilación Atrial/terapia , Resultado del Tratamiento

RESUMEN

Background: The electromechanical dyssynchrony associated with right ventricular pacing (RVP) has been found to have adverse impact on clinical outcomes. Several studies have shown that left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has superior pacing parameters compared with RVP. We aimed to assess the difference in ventricular electromechanical synchrony and investigate the risk of atrial high-rate episodes (AHREs) in patients with LBBAP and RVP. Methods: We consecutively identified 40 patients with atrioventricular block and no prior atrial fibrillation. They were divided according to the ventricular pacing sites: the LBBAP group and the RVP group (including the right ventricular apical pacing (RVA) group and the right side ventricular septal pacing (RVS) group). Evaluation of ventricular electromechanical synchrony was implemented using electrocardiogram and two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography (2D-STE). AHRE was defined as event with an atrial frequency of ≥176 bpm lasting for ≥6 min recorded by pacemakers during follow-up. Results: The paced QRS duration of the LBBAP group was significantly shorter than that of the other two groups: LBBAP 113.56 ± 9.66 ms vs. RVA 164.73 ± 14.49 ms, p < 0.001; LBBAP 113.56 ± 9.66 ms vs. RVS 148.23 ± 17.3 ms, p < 0.001. The LBBAP group showed shorter maximum difference (TDmax), and standard deviation (SD) of the time to peak systolic strain among the 18 left ventricular segments, and time of septal-to-posterior wall motion delay (SPWMD) compared with the RVA group (TDmax, 87.56 ± 56.01 ms vs. 189.85 ± 91.88 ms, p = 0.001; SD, 25.40 ± 14.61 ms vs. 67.13 ± 27.40 ms, p < 0.001; SPWMD, 28.75 ± 21.89 ms vs. 99.09 ± 46.56 ms, p < 0.001) and the RVS group (TDmax, 87.56 ± 56.01 ms vs. 156.46 ± 55.54 ms, p = 0.003; SD, 25.40 ± 14.61 ms vs. 49.02 ± 17.85 ms, p = 0.001; SPWMD, 28.75 ± 21.89 ms vs. 91.54 ± 26.67 ms, p < 0.001). The interventricular mechanical delay (IVMD) was shorter in the LBBAP group compared with the RVA group (-5.38 ± 9.31 ms vs. 44.82 ± 16.42 ms, p < 0.001) and the RVS group (-5.38 ± 9.31 ms vs. 25.31 ± 21.36 ms, p < 0.001). Comparing the RVA group and the RVS group, the paced QRS duration and IVMD were significantly shorter in the RVS group (QRS duration, 164.73 ± 14.49 ms vs. 148.23 ± 17.3 ms, p = 0.02; IVMD, 44.82 ± 16.42 ms vs. 25.31 ± 21.36 ms, p = 0.022). During follow-up, 2/16 (12.5%) LBBAP patients, 4/11 (36.4%) RVA patients, and 8/13 (61.5%) RVS patients had recorded novel AHREs. LBBAP was proven to be independently associated with decreased risk of AHREs than RVP (log-rank p = 0.043). Conclusion: LBBAP generates narrower paced QRS and better intro-left ventricular and biventricular contraction synchronization compared with traditional RVP. LBBAP was associated with a decreased risk of AHREs compared with RVP.

RESUMEN

The adaptive cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) algorithm provides synchronized left ventricular pacing (sLVP). However, ensuring a high sLVP rate is challenging. We assessed the association between the sLVP rate and pacing sites in the right atrium. We evaluated 71 patients who underwent CRT and in whom the adaptive CRT algorithm was applied (53 men; mean age, 66 ± 14 years; median follow-up period, 301 days; IQR: 212-596 days). The atrial pacing leads were positioned in the right atrial (RA) septum in 17 patients (septal group) and in the RA appendage in 54 patients (RA appendage group), with significantly higher sLVP rates in the septal group compared with the RA appendage group (81% ± 30% vs 63% ± 37%; P = 0.045). In patients with first-degree atrioventricular blocks, the sLVP rates tended to be higher in the septal group. Therefore, RA septal pacing increased sLVP rates in patients undergoing CRT.

RESUMEN

Traditional right ventricular pacing (RVP) has been linked to the deterioration of both left ventricular diastolic and systolic function. This worsening often culminates in elevated rates of hospitalization due to heart failure, an increased risk of atrial fibrillation, and increased morbidity. While biventricular pacing (BVP) has demonstrated clinical and echocardiographic improvements in patients afflicted with heart failure and left bundle branch block, it has also encountered significant challenges such as a notable portion of non-responders and procedural failures attributed to anatomical complexities. In recent times, the interest has shifted towards conduction system pacing, initially, His bundle pacing, and more recently, left bundle branch area pacing, which are seen as promising alternatives to established methods. In contrast to other approaches, conduction system pacing offers the advantage of fostering more physiological and harmonized ventricular activation by directly stimulating the His-Purkinje network. This direct pacing results in a more synchronized systolic and diastolic function of the left ventricle compared with RVP and BVP. Of particular note is the capacity of conduction system pacing to yield a shorter QRS, conserve left ventricular ejection fraction, and reduce rates of mitral and tricuspid regurgitation when compared with RVP. The efficacy of conduction system pacing has also been found to have better clinical and echocardiographic improvement than BVP in patients requiring cardiac resynchronization. This review will delve into myocardial function in conduction system pacing compared with that in RVP and BVP.

Asunto(s)

Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial , Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Humanos , Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca/métodos , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial/métodos , Femenino , Masculino , Sistema de Conducción Cardíaco/fisiopatología , Bloqueo de Rama/terapia , Bloqueo de Rama/fisiopatología , Ecocardiografía , Resultado del Tratamiento , Fascículo Atrioventricular/fisiopatología , Anciano , Volumen Sistólico/fisiología , Medición de Riesgo

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Right ventricular (RV) pacing sometimes causes left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction, also known as pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM). However, the association between specifically paced QRS morphology and PICM development has not been elucidated. This study aimed to investigate the association between paced QRS mimicking a complete left bundle branch block (CLBBB) and PICM development. METHODS: We retrospectively screened 2009 patients who underwent pacemaker implantation from 2010 to 2020 in seven institutions. Patients who received pacemakers for an advanced atrioventricular block or bradycardia with atrial fibrillation, baseline LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 50%, and echocardiogram recorded at least 6 months postimplantation were included. The paced QRS recorded immediately after implantation was analyzed. A CLBBB-like paced QRS was defined as meeting the CLBBB criteria of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Foundation/Heart Rhythm Society in 2009. PICM was defined as a ≥10% LVEF decrease, resulting in an LVEF of <50%. RESULTS: Among the 270 patients analyzed, PICM was observed in 38. Baseline LVEF was lower in patients with PICM, and CLBBB-like paced QRS was frequently observed in PICM. Multivariate analysis revealed that low baseline LVEF (odds ratio [OR]: 0.93 per 1% increase, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89-0.98, p = 0.006) and CLBBB-like paced QRS (OR: 2.69, 95% CI: 1.25-5.76, p = 0.011) were significantly associated with PICM development. CONCLUSION: CLBBB-like paced QRS may be a novel risk factor for PICM. RV pacing, which causes CLBBB-like QRS morphology, may need to be avoided, and patients with CLBBB-like paced QRS should be followed-up carefully.

Asunto(s)

Potenciales de Acción , Bloqueo de Rama , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial , Cardiomiopatías , Electrocardiografía , Frecuencia Cardíaca , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Volumen Sistólico , Función Ventricular Izquierda , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Bloqueo Atrioventricular/fisiopatología , Bloqueo Atrioventricular/diagnóstico , Bloqueo Atrioventricular/terapia , Bloqueo Atrioventricular/etiología , Bloqueo de Rama/fisiopatología , Bloqueo de Rama/diagnóstico , Bloqueo de Rama/terapia , Bloqueo de Rama/etiología , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial/efectos adversos , Cardiomiopatías/fisiopatología , Cardiomiopatías/etiología , Cardiomiopatías/terapia , Cardiomiopatías/diagnóstico , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Función Ventricular Derecha