Search

Background: His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) are emerging therapies for patients with heart failure and conduction disorders, offering potential advantages over traditional pacing methods. These approaches aim to restore physiological conduction and improve cardiac function more effectively. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of HBP and LBBP in patients with heart failure and conduction disturbances, comparing these techniques to conventional pacing. Methods: A comprehensive review of recent studies and clinical trials was conducted, focusing on the performance of HBP and LBBP in improving cardiac function, reducing QRS duration, and enhancing overall patient outcomes. The analysis includes data on clinical efficacy, procedural safety, and long-term benefits associated with these pacing modalities. Results: Both HBP and LBBP have demonstrated significant improvements in cardiac function and clinical outcomes compared to conventional pacing. HBP effectively restores physiological conduction with improved synchronization and a reduction in QRS duration. LBBP has shown enhanced left ventricular activation, leading to better overall cardiac performance. Both techniques have been associated with a lower incidence of complications and a higher success rate in achieving optimal pacing thresholds. Conclusions: HBP and LBBP offer promising alternatives to traditional pacing for patients with heart failure and conduction disorders. These advanced pacing strategies provide superior clinical outcomes and improved cardiac function with reduced risk of complications. Further research and clinical trials are needed to fully establish the long-term benefits and safety profiles of these techniques in diverse patient populations.

The electrophysiological activity of the heart is recorded and presented in form of electrocardiogram (ECG). In 1998 the concept of P wave dispersion as the risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence was introduced. It was calculated as the difference between the longest and the shortest P wave. The aim of our study is to prove that the P wave dispersion is an artifact of low accuracy in P wave measurement. The study included 186 patients (78M 108F) aged 59.7 ± 12.9 years, undergoing various electrophysiological procedures. The P wave was measured twice: first, at the paper speed of 50 mm/s, enhancement 8× (standard – imprecise) and the second time at 200 mm/s, 64–256× (precise). The imprecise measurement method resulted in different duration of all P wave parameters in comparison with precise measurement. The difference between Δ P max and Δ P min indicated a higher value for the latter parameter. It was indicated that the imprecise P wave dispersion value correlated most significantly with the maximal P wave duration, which was measured in a similar way. In contrast with the imprecise measurement method, the minimal and maximal durations of the P waves, being measured accurately, were almost identical. Using precise methodology, the P wave dispersion reaches negligible values and tends to zero. The measurements of the P wave have to be precise to assure the highest scientific and medical sincerity. The highest clinical value is related to the P wave duration.