Key result
Bipolar anodal septal pacing with direct LBB capture significantly improved interventricular dyssynchrony (-9 ms vs -24 ms, p<0.001) and shortened local depolarization durations compared to unipolar nonselective left bundle branch pacing.
Why the study?
LBBP produces delayed, unphysiological activation of the right ventricle, prompting exploration of how bipolar anodal septal pacing with direct LBB capture affects ventricular depolarization.
Does bipolar anodal septal pacing with direct LBB capture improve interventricular synchrony compared to unipolar nonselective left bundle branch pacing in patients with bradycardia?
Observational (n=116)
Does bipolar anodal septal pacing with direct LBB capture improve interventricular synchrony compared to unipolar nonselective left bundle branch pacing in patients with bradycardia?
Absolute Event Rate: -9% vs -24%
p-value: p=<0.001
Bipolar anodal septal pacing with direct LBB capture improves interventricular synchrony compared to unipolar nonselective LBB pacing, though it remains less physiological than His bundle pacing.
May improve synchrony in LBB pacing; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Background Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) produces delayed, unphysiological activation of the right ventricle. Using ultra-high-frequency electrocardiography (UHF-ECG), we explored how bipolar anodal septal pacing with direct LBB capture (aLBBP) affects the resultant ventricular depolarization pattern. Methods In patients with bradycardia, His bundle pacing (HBP), unipolar nonselective LBBP (nsLBBP), aLBBP, and right ventricular septal pacing (RVSP) were performed. Timing of local ventricular activation, in leads V1-V8, was displayed using UHF-ECG, and electrical dyssynchrony (e-DYS) was calculated as the difference between the first and last activation. Durations of local depolarizations were determined as the width of the UHF-QRS complex at 50% of its amplitude. Results aLBBP was feasible in 63 of 75 consecutive patients with successful nsLBBP. aLBBP significantly improved interventricular dyssynchrony (−9 ms (−12;−6) vs. −24 ms (−27;−21),), p < 0.001) and shortened local depolarization durations in V1–V4 (mean differences −7 ms to −5 ms (−11;−1), p < 0.05) compared to nsLBBP. Both aLBBP and HBP caused similar absolute levels of interventricular dyssynchrony (e-DYS −9 ms (−12; −6) vs. 10 ms (7;14); however, local depolarization durations in V1–V2 during aLBBP were longer than HBP (differences 5–9 ms (1;14), p < 0.05, with local depolarization duration in V1 during aLBBP being the same as during RVSP (difference 2 ms (−2;6), p = 0.52). Conclusion Although aLBBP significantly improved interventricular synchrony and depolarization duration of the septum and RV compared to unipolar nsLBBP, the resultant ventricular depolarization was still less physiological than during HBP.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Čurila et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Bradycardia (n=116). Bipolar anodal septal pacing with direct LBB capture (aLBBP) vs. Unipolar nonselective left bundle branch pacing (nsLBBP) was evaluated on Interventricular electrical dyssynchrony (e-DYS) (p=<0.001). Bipolar anodal septal pacing with direct LBB capture significantly improved interventricular dyssynchrony (-9 ms vs -24 ms, p<0.001) and shortened local depolarization durations compared to unipolar nonselective left bundle branch pacing.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: