Rescue left bundle branch area pacing in coronary venous lead failure or nonresponse to biventricular pacing: Results from International LBBAP Collaborative Study Group

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00064173%3A_____%2F22%3A43923543" target="_blank" >RIV/00064173:_____/22:43923543 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216208:11120/22:43923543

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2022.04.024" target="_blank" >https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2022.04.024</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2022.04.024" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.hrthm.2022.04.024</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Rescue left bundle branch area pacing in coronary venous lead failure or nonresponse to biventricular pacing: Results from International LBBAP Collaborative Study Group

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) using biventricular pacing (BVP) is effective in patients with heart failure, left bundle branch block (LBBB) and reduced left ventricular function. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has been reported as an alternative option for CRT. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and outcomes of LBBAP in patients who failed conventional BVP due to coronary venous lead complications or were non-responders to BVP. METHODS: At 16 international centers, LBBAP was attempted in patients with conventional CRT indication who failed BVP due to either, coronary venous (CV) lead complications, or lack of therapeutic response to BVP. We are reporting heart failure hospitalizations (HFH) and death, echocardiographic outcomes, procedural data, pacing parameters, and lead complications including CV lead failure. RESULTS: LBBAP was successfully performed in 200 patients (CV lead failures-156; non-responders-44): age 68+-11years, female-35%, LBBB-55%, RVP-23%, ischemic cardiomyopathy-28%, nonischemic cardiomyopathy-63%, LVEF &lt;=35% in 80%. Procedure and fluoroscopy duration were 119.5+-59.6 and 25.7+-18.5 min. LBBAP threshold and R-wave amplitudes were 0.68+-0.35V@0.45ms and 10.4+-5mV at implant and remained stable during mean follow-up of 12+-10.1 months. LBBAP resulted in significant QRS narrowing from 170+-28ms to 139+-25ms (p&lt;0.001) with V6 R-wave peak times of 85+-17ms. LVEF improved from 29+-10% at baseline to 40+-12% (p&lt;0.001) during follow-up. The risk for death or HFH was lower in CV lead failure compared to non-responders (HR-0.357;95%CI 0.168-0.756,p=0.007) CONCLUSION: LBBAP is a viable alternative for CRT in patients who failed conventional BVP due to CV lead failure or were non-responders.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Rescue left bundle branch area pacing in coronary venous lead failure or nonresponse to biventricular pacing: Results from International LBBAP Collaborative Study Group

Popis výsledku anglicky

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) using biventricular pacing (BVP) is effective in patients with heart failure, left bundle branch block (LBBB) and reduced left ventricular function. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has been reported as an alternative option for CRT. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and outcomes of LBBAP in patients who failed conventional BVP due to coronary venous lead complications or were non-responders to BVP. METHODS: At 16 international centers, LBBAP was attempted in patients with conventional CRT indication who failed BVP due to either, coronary venous (CV) lead complications, or lack of therapeutic response to BVP. We are reporting heart failure hospitalizations (HFH) and death, echocardiographic outcomes, procedural data, pacing parameters, and lead complications including CV lead failure. RESULTS: LBBAP was successfully performed in 200 patients (CV lead failures-156; non-responders-44): age 68+-11years, female-35%, LBBB-55%, RVP-23%, ischemic cardiomyopathy-28%, nonischemic cardiomyopathy-63%, LVEF &lt;=35% in 80%. Procedure and fluoroscopy duration were 119.5+-59.6 and 25.7+-18.5 min. LBBAP threshold and R-wave amplitudes were 0.68+-0.35V@0.45ms and 10.4+-5mV at implant and remained stable during mean follow-up of 12+-10.1 months. LBBAP resulted in significant QRS narrowing from 170+-28ms to 139+-25ms (p&lt;0.001) with V6 R-wave peak times of 85+-17ms. LVEF improved from 29+-10% at baseline to 40+-12% (p&lt;0.001) during follow-up. The risk for death or HFH was lower in CV lead failure compared to non-responders (HR-0.357;95%CI 0.168-0.756,p=0.007) CONCLUSION: LBBAP is a viable alternative for CRT in patients who failed conventional BVP due to CV lead failure or were non-responders.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30201 - Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

N - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z neverejnych zdroju

Rok uplatnění

2022

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Heart Rhythm

ISSN

1547-5271

e-ISSN

1556-3871

Svazek periodika

19

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

8

Stát vydavatele periodika

US - Spojené státy americké

Počet stran výsledku

9

Strana od-do

1272-1280

Kód UT WoS článku

000839329000011

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85130360017