Impact of His bundle pacing on right ventricular performance in patients undergoing permanent pacemaker implantation
The result's identifiers
Result code in IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11150%2F21%3A10427196" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11150/21:10427196 - isvavai.cz</a>
Alternative codes found
RIV/00216208:11120/21:43921419 RIV/00179906:_____/21:10427196 RIV/00064173:_____/21:N0000078
Result on the web
<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=YnTpOBDEPx" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=YnTpOBDEPx</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pace.14249" target="_blank" >10.1111/pace.14249</a>
Alternative languages
Result language
angličtina
Original language name
Impact of His bundle pacing on right ventricular performance in patients undergoing permanent pacemaker implantation
Original language description
BACKGROUND: His-Bundle pacing (HBP) is an emerging technique for physiological pacing. However, its effects on right ventricle (RV) performance are still unknown. METHODS: We enrolled consecutive patients with an indication for pacemaker (PM) implantation to compare HBP versus RV pacing (RVP) effects on RV performance. Patients were evaluated before implantation and after six months by a transthoracic echocardiogram. RESULTS: A total of 84 patients (age 75.1+-7.9 years, 64% male) were enrolled, 42 patients (50%) underwent successful HBP, and 42 patients (50%) apical RVP. At follow up, we found a significant improvement in RV-FAC(Fractional Area Change)% [baseline: HBP 34 IQR(31-37) vs. RVP 33 IQR(29.7-37.2),p = 0.602; 6-months: HBP 37 IQR(33-39) vs. RVP 30 IQR(27.7-35),p<0.0001] and RV-GLS(Global Longitudinal Strain)% [baseline: HBP -18 IQR(-20.2 to -15) vs. RVP -16 IQR(-18.7 to -14),p = 0.150; 6-months: HBP -20 IQR(-23 to -17) vs. RVP -13.5 IQR(-16 to -11),p<0.0001]with HBP whereas RVP was associated with a significant decline in both parameters. RVP was also associated with a significant worsening of TAPSE (Tricuspid Annular Plane Systolic Excursion) (p<0.0001) and S wave velocity (p <0.0001) at follow up. Conversely from RVP, HBP significantly improved PASP (Pulmonary Artery Systolic Pressure) [baseline: HBP 38 IQR(32-42)mmHg vs. RVP 34 IQR(31.5-37)mmHg,p = 0.060; 6-months: HBP 32 IQR(26-38)mmHg vs. RVP 39 IQR(36-41)mmHg, p <0.0001] and tricuspid regurgitation (p = 0.005) irrespectively from lead position above or below the tricuspid valve. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing PM implantation, HBP ensues a beneficial and protective impact on RV performance compared with RVP.
Czech name
—
Czech description
—
Classification
Type
J<sub>imp</sub> - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database
CEP classification
—
OECD FORD branch
30201 - Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems
Result continuities
Project
—
Continuities
I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Others
Publication year
2021
Confidentiality
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Data specific for result type
Name of the periodical
PACE: Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
ISSN
0147-8389
e-ISSN
—
Volume of the periodical
44
Issue of the periodical within the volume
6
Country of publishing house
US - UNITED STATES
Number of pages
9
Pages from-to
986-994
UT code for WoS article
000647957800001
EID of the result in the Scopus database
2-s2.0-85105653020