1. Cardiac resynchronization therapy via left bundle branch pacing vs. optimized biventricular pacing with adaptive algorithm in heart failure with left bundle branch block: a prospective, multi-centre, observational study
- Author
-
Jingfeng Wang, Xianxian Zhao, Yixiu Liang, Guosheng Fu, Xia Sheng, Junbo Ge, Kenneth A. Ellenbogen, Shengmei Qin, Xueying Chen, Zhongkai Wang, Yangang Su, Zhaohui Qiu, Yang Ye, Wei Wang, Haiyan Chen, Qinchun Jin, Jin Bai, and Feng Gao
- Subjects
Bundle of His ,medicine.medical_specialty ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Bundle-Branch Block ,Cardiac resynchronization therapy ,Ventricular Function, Left ,Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy ,Electrocardiography ,QRS complex ,Physiology (medical) ,Internal medicine ,Left bundle branch ,medicine ,Humans ,Prospective Studies ,Multi centre ,Heart Failure ,Ejection fraction ,Left bundle branch block ,business.industry ,Stroke Volume ,medicine.disease ,Treatment Outcome ,Heart failure ,Cardiology ,Implant ,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine ,business ,Algorithms - Abstract
Aims The purpose of our study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) via left bundle branch pacing (LBBP-CRT) compared with optimized biventricular pacing (BVP) with adaptive algorithm (BVP-aCRT) in heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% (HFrEF) and left bundle branch block (LBBB). Methods and results One hundred patients with HFrEF and LBBB undergoing CRT were prospectively enrolled in a non-randomized fashion and divided into two groups (LBBP-CRT, n = 49; BVP-aCRT, n = 51) in four centres. Implant characteristics and echocardiographic parameters were accessed at baseline and during 6-month and 1-year follow-up. The success rate for LBBP-CRT and BVP-aCRT was 98.00% and 91.07%. Fused LBBP had the greatest reduced QRS duration compared to BVP-aCRT (126.54 ± 11.67 vs. 102.61 ± 9.66 ms, P Conclusions The feasibility and efficacy of LBBP-CRT demonstrated better electromechanical resynchronization and higher clinical and echocardiographic response, especially higher super-response than BVP-aCRT in HFrEF with LBBB.
- Published
- 2021