Key result
His-Purkinje system pacing improves LVEF by ~13% and shortens QRS in PICM.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of His-Purkinje system pacing in the management of patients with pace-induced cardiomyopathy.
Does upgrading to His-Purkinje system pacing improve cardiac function and reverse remodeling in patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy?
Meta-Analysis (n=164)
Does upgrading to His-Purkinje system pacing improve cardiac function and reverse remodeling in patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy?
Effect estimate: Increase 13.41% (95% CI 11.21-15.61)
Upgrading to His-Purkinje system pacing significantly improves left ventricular ejection fraction, NYHA class, and promotes reverse remodeling in patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy.
Supports upgrading to His-Purkinje system pacing in pacing-induced cardiomyopathy; extends meta-analytic evidence for physiological pacing.
Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of His-Purkinje system pacing (HPSP) in the management of patients with pace-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM). Methods PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched comprehensively to collect related studies published from the inception of databases to June 1, 2022. R 4.04 software, including the Metafor package, matrix package, and the Meta package, was utilized to conduct the singe-arm meta-analysis. The methodology index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Results A total of seven studies were included, involving 164 PICM patients. The meta-analysis showed that HPSP ameliorated the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by 13.41% (95% CI [11.21–15.61]), improved the New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification by 1.02 (95% CI [−1.41 to −0.63]), and shortened the QRS duration (QRSd) by 60.85 ms (95% CI [−63.94 to −57.75]), resulting in improved cardiac functions in PICM patients. Besides, HPSP reversed the ventricular remodeling, with a 32.46 ml (95% CI [−53.18 to −11.75]) decrease in left ventricular end systolic volume (LVESV) and a 5.93 mm (95% CI [−7.68 to −4.19]) decrease in left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD). HPSP also showed stable electrical parameters of pacemakers, with a 0.07 V (95% CI [0.01–0.13]) increase in pacing threshold, a 0.02 mV (95% CI [−0.85 to 0.90]) increase in sensed R-wave amplitude, and a 31.12 Ω reduction in impedance (95% CI [−69.62 to 7.39]). Compared with LBBP, HBP improved LVEF by 13.28% (95% CI [−11.64 to 14.92]) vs 14.43% (95% CI [−13.01 to 15.85]), ameliorated NHYA classification by 1.18 (95% CI [−1.97 to −0.39]) vs 0.95 (95% CI [−1.33 to −0.58]), shortened QRSd by 63.16 ms (95% CI [−67.00 to −59.32]) vs 57.98 ms (95% CI [−62.52 to −53.25]), and decreased LVEDD by 4.12 mm (95% CI [−5.79 to −2.45]) vs 6.26 mm (95% CI [−62.52 to −53.25]). The electrical parameters of the pacemaker were stable in both groups. Conclusions This meta-analysis showed that HPSP could significantly improve cardiac function, promote reverse remodeling, and provide stable electrical parameters of pacemakers for PICM patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tang et al. (2023) conducted a meta-analysis in Pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) (n=164). His-Purkinje system pacing (HPSP) was evaluated on Change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (Increase 13.41%, 95% CI 11.21-15.61). His-Purkinje system pacing improved left ventricular ejection fraction by 13.41% (95% CI 11.21-15.61) and shortened QRS duration by 60.85 ms in patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: