Key result
His bundle pacing using conventional pacemaker leads was successful in 67% of patients, achieving narrowed paced QRS and stable left ventricular function over 24 months.
Why the study?
Right ventricular apical pacing can cause left ventricular function deterioration and heart failure, whereas His bundle pacing has been found to significantly minimize pacing-induced cardiomyopathy.
Is His bundle pacing using conventional pacemaker leads feasible and effective in preserving or improving left ventricular function in patients with high-degree AV block or CRT indications?
Observational (n=45)
No
Is His bundle pacing using conventional pacemaker leads feasible and effective in preserving or improving left ventricular function in patients with high-degree AV block or CRT indications?
His bundle pacing using conventional pacemaker leads is a feasible, lower-cost alternative that preserves or improves left ventricular function, though it yields a lower procedural success rate than specialized delivery systems.
Supports feasibility with conventional leads in this series; hypothesis-generating for LV preservation, needs prospective trials.
Background The classical pacing site at the right ventricular apex has been noticed to induce left ventricular function deterioration and heart failure over long pacing periods. Trials of right ventricular outflow tract pacing have been reported to reduce this problem in a few patients. Objectives His bundle pacing has been lately found to minimize pacing-induced cardiomyopathy significantly. Materials and Methods Patients included are those with high degree heart block, who needed conventional pacing and those with an indication for cardiac resynchronization therapy, where His bundle pacing was done as a substitute to a failed coronary sinus lead positioning for left ventricular epicardial pacing. His Bundle Pacing was done by blind His pacing site assessment through continuous ventricular pacing at the presumed His bundle site under fluoroscopy views. The leads used are conventional pacing leads. His bundle pacing was indicated by almost normal width paced QRS. Results His bundle pacing was successful in 30 patients from a total of 45 referred patients (67%). Fifteen patients with second or third-degree heart block who needed conventional pacing and 15 patients with an indication for cardiac resynchronization therapy, where His bundle pacing was done as a substitute to a failed coronary sinus lead positioning for left ventricular epicardial pacing. The 15 patients with high grades atrioventricular block did not show evidence of heart failure and dilated cardiomyopathy. The 15 patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy indication showed marked narrowing of the paced QRS, improvement in NYHA functional class, significant improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction, and reduction of cardiac size. Conclusion His bundle pacing is more physiological than right ventricular apical pacing and right ventricular outflow pacing as far as narrowing of the paced QRS, left ventricular function stability, and reduced incidence of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. It is recommended in all conventional pacing indication. Whether patients with atrioventricular block or in cardiac resynchronization therapy indication when coronary sinus/left ventricular lead failed. Future availability of special leads and delivery system, improvement in leads, the design and positioning techniques at the His site may well improve the success rate of His bundle pacing and may replace left ventricular epicardial pacing in cardiac re synchronization therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ammar T. Al-Hamdi (2020) conducted an observational in High degree atrioventricular block or heart failure (n=45). His bundle pacing using conventional pacemaker leads was evaluated on Successful His bundle pacing (indicated by narrowing of the paced QRS). His bundle pacing using conventional pacemaker leads was successful in 67% of patients, achieving narrowed paced QRS and stable left ventricular function over 24 months.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: