Left bundle branch area pacing yielded a narrower paced QRS duration (121.49 vs 145.62 ms; P<0.001) and shorter QT interval (434.16 vs 462.66 ms; P<0.001) than right ventricular septum pacing.
RCT (n=131)
Does left bundle branch area pacing improve depolarization-repolarization measures compared to right ventricular septum pacing in pacing-indicated patients?
Left bundle branch area pacing provides better depolarization-repolarization reserve than right ventricular septum pacing, which may predict a lower risk of ventricular arrhythmias.
Tasa de eventos absoluta: 434.16% vs 462.66%
valor p: p=<0.001
Abstract Introduction Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has recently been reported to be a new physiological pacing strategy with clinical feasibility and safety. The present study aims to investigate depolarization‐repolarization measures including QT interval, QT dispersion (QTD), and T peak‐end interval (T p T e ) in this novel LBBAP strategy. Methods and Results A total of 131 pacing‐indicated patients were prospectively enrolled and randomized to the LBBAP group (n = 66) and right ventricular septum pacing (RVSP) group (n = 65). LBBAP was successfully achieved in 61 subjects with stable lead performance and comparable complications (ie, pocket hematoma, lead perforation, and dislodgement) compared with RVSP. Of the 61 patients with successful LBBAP, the mean LV peak activation time was 67.89 ± 6.80 ms, with the LBB potential mapped in 46 cases (75.4%). Electrocardiogram (ECG) indices were compared between these two groups before and after implantation. As a result, LBBAP yielded a narrower paced QRS duration (121.49 ± 9.87 ms vs 145.62 ± 8.89 ms; P < .001), shorter QT interval (434.16 ± 32.70 ms vs 462.66 ± 32.04 ms; P < .001), and QT c interval (472.44 ± 33.30 ms vs 499.65 ± 31.35 ms; P < .001), lower QTD (40.10 ± 8.68 ms vs 46.11 ± 10.85 ms; P = .001), and QT c D (43.57 ± 8.78 ms vs 49.86 ± 11.98 ms; P = .001), and shorter T p T e (96.59 ± 10.76 ms vs 103.77 ± 10.16 ms; P < .001) than RVSP. However, T p T e /QT ratio did not differ between these two groups (0.223 ± 0.026 vs 0.225 ± 0.022; P = .733). Furthermore, LBBAP displayed less increased QRS duration, QT c interval, QTD, QT c D, and a more shortened QT interval compared with RVSP (all P < .05). Conclusion LBBAP proves to be a feasible and safe pacing procedure with better depolarization‐repolarization reserve, which may predict lower risk of ventricular arrhythmia and sudden cardiac death.
Wang et al. (Thu,) conducted a rct in Pacing-indicated patients (n=131). Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) vs. Right ventricular septum pacing (RVSP) was evaluated on QT interval (p=<0.001). Left bundle branch area pacing yielded a narrower paced QRS duration (121.49 vs 145.62 ms; P<0.001) and shorter QT interval (434.16 vs 462.66 ms; P<0.001) than right ventricular septum pacing.