دورية أكاديمية
His bundle pacing versus left bundle branch pacing on ventricular function in atrial fibrillation patients referred for pacing: a prospective crossover comparison.
| العنوان: | His bundle pacing versus left bundle branch pacing on ventricular function in atrial fibrillation patients referred for pacing: a prospective crossover comparison. |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Yang YE, Bo GAO, Yuan LV, Tian-Tian XU, Si-Si ZHANG, Xiao-Li LU, Ying YANG, Dong-Me JIANG, Yi-Wen PAN, Xia SHENG, Bei WANG, Yan-Kai MAO, Zu-Wen ZHANG, Shi-Quan CHEN, Jie-Fang ZHANG, Li WANG, Jiang-Fen JIANG, Ya-Xun SUN, Yan MA, Fei-Ling WANG |
| المصدر: | Journal of Geriatric Cardiology; 2023, Vol. 20 Issue 1, p51-60, 10p |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: | LEFT heart ventricle, VENTRICULAR ejection fraction, BUNDLE-branch block, RIGHT heart ventricle, ATRIAL fibrillation, CARDIAC pacing, HEART ventricles, T-test (Statistics), DESCRIPTIVE statistics, QUALITY of life, HEART physiology, DATA analysis software, HIS bundle, LONGITUDINAL method |
| مستخلص: | BACKGROUND His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) both provide physiologic pacing which maintain left ventricular synchrony. They both improve heart failure (HF) symptoms in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. We aimed to assess the intra-patient comparison of ventricular function and remodeling as well as leads parameters corresponding to two pacing modalities in AF patients referred for pacing in intermediate term. METHODS Uncontrolled tachycardia AF patients with both leads implantation successfully were randomized to either modality. Echocardiographic measurements, New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification, quality-of-life assessments and leads parameters were obtained at baseline and at each 6-month follow up. Left ventricular function including the left ventricular endosystolic volume (LVESV), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and right ventricular (RV) function quantified by tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) were all assessed. RESULTS Consecutively twenty-eight patients implanted with both HBP and LBBP leads successfully were enrolled (69.1 ± 8.1 years, 53.6% male, LVEF 59.2% ± 13.7%). The LVESV was improved by both pacing modalities in all patients (n = 23) and the LVEF was improved in patients with baseline LVEF at less than 50% (n = 6). The TAPSE was improved by HBP but not LBBP (n = 23). CONCLUSION In this crossover comparison between HBP and LBBP, LBBP was found to have an equivalent effect on LV function and remodeling but better and more stable parameters in AF patients with uncontrolled ventricular rates referred for atrioventricular node (AVN) ablation. HBP could be preferred in patients with reduced TAPSE at baseline rather than LBBP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Geriatric Cardiology is the property of Journal of Geriatric Cardiology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| قاعدة البيانات: | Complementary Index |
كن أول من يترك تعليقا!