Search

Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is the standard‐of‐care therapy for the patients with heart failure and left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony. However, approximately 30% of the patients show no response. Recent studies have shown that His bundle pacing (HBP) could be an alternative for the patients with CRT indications. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of HBP in patients with heart failure. Methods: We searched PubMed and Embase databases for studies evaluating HBP in patients with heart failure and LV dyssynchrony. The successful rate of implantation, QRS duration, pacing threshold, LV function at baseline and follow‐up, and mortality rates were extracted and summarized. Results: Eleven studies including 494 patients were included in this analysis. The overall successful rate for implantation was 82.4%. The main indications for HBP were CRT candidates and cardiomyopathy with atrial fibrillation undergoing atrioventricular node ablation. Permanent HBP resulted in narrow QRS duration of 116.3 ± 13.9 ms after implantation. LV functions, including echocardiographic parameters and clinical outcomes, significantly improved at follow‐up (P < 0.001). However, there was a trend of increased capture and bundle branch block correction thresholds at follow‐up compared to baseline (P = 0.01 and 0.02, respectively). During a mean follow‐up of 23.7 months, 5.9% of the patients experienced heart failure‐related hospitalization and the mortality rate was 9.1%. Conclusion: Permanent HBP has shown promising results for heart failure patients in small observational studies. Randomized controlled trials are needed to assess the efficacy of HBP in these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Traditional right ventricular (RV) pacing for the management of bradyarrhythmias has been pursued successfully for decades, although there remains debate regarding optimal pacing site with respect to both hemodynamic and clinical outcomes. The deleterious effects of long-term RV apical pacing have been well recognized. This has generated interest in approaches providing more physiological stimulation, namely, His bundle pacing (HBP). This paper reviews the anatomy of the His bundle, early clinical observations, and current approaches to permanent HBP. By stimulating the His-Purkinje network, HBP engages electrical activation of both ventricles and may avoid marked dyssynchrony. Recent studies have also demonstrated the potential of HBP in patients with underlying left bundle branch block and cardiomyopathy. HBP holds promise as an attractive mode to achieve physiological pacing. Widespread adaptation of this technique is dependent on enhancements in technology, as well as further validation of efficacy in large randomized clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

His bundle pacing (HBP) prevents ventricular dyssynchrony and its long-term consequences by preserving normal electrical activation of the ventricles. Since the original description of permanent HBP in 2000, the adoption of HBP has increased over the past several years. However, the reporting of procedural and clinical outcomes to date is not uniform. This article is a collaboration between several implanters with significant experience in HBP to establish a uniform set of definitions encompassing the different forms of HBP as well as define a standardized approach to gathering data end points to ensure consistency in reported outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Permanent His bundle pacing (HBP) is a physiological alternative to right ventricular pacing (RVP). Catheter manipulation during HBP can cause trauma to the His bundle during implantation. We sought to determine acute and long-term incidence of His bundle (HB) injury with HBP.Methods: Patients undergoing permanent HBP at Geisinger Wyoming Valley Medical Center from 2006 to 2014 formed the study group. Patients with pre-existing His-Purkinje disease (HPD) were excluded from the study. Any development of new bundle branch block (BBB) or AV block (B) during acute HBP lead-induced block was recorded. Resolution of AVB and/or BBB was documented.Results: HBP was attempted in 450 patients. In 358 patients without HPD, 28 (7.8%) developed acute HB injury in the form of complete AVB (4, 1.1%), RBBB (21, 5.9%) or LBBB (3, 0.8%) during HBP lead placement. In all 7 patients with AVB or LBBB, conduction completely recovered. The HB electrogram from the lead displayed injury current in all 7 patients. Lead-induced RBBB resolved in 12 of 21 patients and persisted in 9 (2.5%) patients. Pacing from the HBP lead resulted in correction of acute conduction block in 27 of 28 patients and 8 of 9 patients with chronic RBBB. None of the patients with transient conduction block developed new conduction disease during follow-up of 21±19months.Conclusions: Despite acute trauma to HB in 7.8% of patients undergoing permanent HBP, complete resolution of conduction block occurred in 19 of 28 patients (68%). RBBB persisted in 9 patients (32%) but mostly normalized with HBP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) or biventricular pacing (BIVP) has become a common procedure for the treatment of ventricular dyssynchrony in patients with heart failure, particularly in those with bundle branch block patterns (QRS durations >150ms) on the electrocardiogram (ECG). However, a large group of non-responders are made up of patients with dyssynchrony and QRS duration below 130ms. Recent studies have introduced permanent His bundle pacing as another method for achieving normalization of the QRS duration even in a majority of patients with right or left bundle branch block pattern on the ECG.Hypotheses: We hypothesize 1. Biventricular pacing, (BIVP) performed as the standard procedure for CRT is inherently abnormal, spatially, at the right and left ventricular apex, and temporally, in regard to the timing of normal activation of the interventricular conduction system. Corollary 1. Permanent, selective, His bundle pacing (PHBP) is the most physiological form of ventricular pacing which replicates the normal activation of the interventricular conduction system. Corollary 2. An appropriately powered, prospective, crossover trial comparing PHBP with BIVP will show that the former is associated with the same benefits in patients with heart failure and QRS durations >130ms and would improve, rather than worsen, outcomes in heart failure patients with QRS duration <130ms. We present experimental and clinical evidence in support of these hypotheses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Initial efforts to artificially stimulate the heart were borne out of a necessity to prevent catastrophic bradycardic events. The initial pacemaker systems were large, bulky external devices. However, advancements in technology allowed for the development of internally powered, fully implantable devices. Further advancements resulted in more complex, programmable devices, but the overall systems have remained largely unchanged for more than 50 years. The most recent advancements in the field have represented fundamental paradigm shifts in both pacemaker design and the approach to cardiac pacing. These efforts have focused on reducing and eliminating hardware to reduce the risk of complications and to focus on improving cardiac efficiency to improve clinical outcomes. In this article, the authors explore these advances including leadless pacemaker systems, permanent His bundle pacing and advances in the field of cardiac resynchronisation therapy., Competing Interests: Disclosure: NV receives honoraria from Medtronic and Biotronik; BPK is a consultant for and receives honoraria from Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic and Abbott.