Key result
LBBP improves LVEF by ~6% vs other pacing techniques.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to compare His-Purkinje system pacing, a novel CRT technique targeting the intrinsic conduction system, with conventional biventricular pacing in heart failure patients with LV dysfunction and dyssynchrony.
Does His-Purkinje system pacing improve QRS duration, LVEF, and clinical outcomes compared to conventional biventricular pacing in heart failure patients with LV dysfunction and dyssynchrony?
Meta-Analysis (n=1,291)
Does His-Purkinje system pacing improve QRS duration, LVEF, and clinical outcomes compared to conventional biventricular pacing in heart failure patients with LV dysfunction and dyssynchrony?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Left bundle branch pacing demonstrates superior improvements in LVEF, LVEDD, and NYHA functional class compared to conventional biventricular pacing in heart failure patients with dyssynchrony.
BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis compares His-Purkinje system pacing (HPSP), a novel cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) technique that targets the intrinsic conduction system of the heart, with conventional biventricular pacing (BiVP) in heart failure (HF) patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and dyssynchrony. METHODS: We searched multiple databases up to May 2023 and identified 18 studies (five randomized controlled trials and 13 observational studies) involving 1291 patients. The outcome measures were QRS duration, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) change, HF hospitalization, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class improvement. We used a random-effects model to calculate odds ratios (OR), and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We also assessed the methodological quality of the studies. RESULTS: The mean LVEF was 30.7% and the mean follow-up duration was 8.1 months. Among LBBP, HBP, and BiVP, HBP provided the shortest QRS duration [MD: -18.84 ms, 95% CI: -28.74 to -8.94; p = 0.0002], while LBBP showed the greatest improvement in LVEF [MD: 5.74, 95% CI: 2.74 to 7.46; p < 0.0001], LVEDD [MD: -5.55 mm, 95% CI: -7.51 to -3.59; p < 0.00001], and NYHA functional class [MD: -0.58, 95% CI: -0.80 to --0.35; p < 0.00001]. However, there was no significant difference in HF hospitalization between HPSP and BiVP. CONCLUSION: LBBP as modality of HPSP demonstrated superior outcomes in achieving electrical ventricular synchrony and systolic function, as well as alleviating HF symptoms, compared to other pacing techniques.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hennawi et al. (2023) conducted a meta-analysis in Heart failure with left ventricular dysfunction and dyssynchrony (n=1,291). His-Purkinje system pacing (His-bundle pacing and left bundle branch pacing) vs. Conventional biventricular pacing (BiVP) was evaluated on Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement (MD 5.74, 95% CI 2.74 to 7.46, p=< 0.0001). Left bundle branch pacing demonstrated superior improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction compared to other pacing techniques (MD 5.74; 95% CI 2.74 to 7.46; p<0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: