Key result
Left bundle branch area pacing improved left ventricular ejection fraction from 35% to 53% and resolved heart failure symptoms in a patient with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy.
Why the study?
Conventional RVa pacing increases pacing-induced cardiomyopathy risk, but evidence on whether LBBAP can reverse it is lacking.
Does left bundle branch area pacing improve left ventricular function in patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy?
Case Report (n=1)
No
Does left bundle branch area pacing improve left ventricular function in patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy?
Absolute Event Rate: 53% vs 35%
Left bundle branch area pacing can successfully reverse pacing-induced cardiomyopathy and improve left ventricular function in patients previously treated with right ventricular apex pacing.
LBBAP may reverse PICM in select cases; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective confirmation.
Conventional right ventricular apex (RVa) pacing increases the risk of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM), especially in elderly patients with a higher ventricular pacing burden. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has been suggested as an alternative to conventional RVa pacing. However, there is a lack of evidence that LBBAP may reverse PICM. We report a case of a reversal of PICM after LBBAP. An 81-year-old woman with a history of complete atrioventricular block and baseline QRS duration of 142 ms received permanent pacemaker implantation with dual pacing. The ventricular lead was placed at the apical direction and paced QRS duration was 146 ms. After 8 months, the patient visited with acute heart failure. The patient’s ventricular pacing burden was > 99%, and echocardiography found severe depression of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, 30%), left ventricular dyssynchrony, and global hypokinesia. Despite 3 months of optimal medical management of heart failure, there was minimal improvement in LVEF (35%) and ventricular dyssynchrony persisted. The patient's presentation was consistent with PICM. LBBAP was performed with a stylet-driven lead and a delivery sheath (Biotronik Selectra 3D, Biotronik, Berlin, Germany). The lead was placed at the area of the left bundle branch trunk and non-selective LBBAP was achieved with a left ventricular activation time of 71 ms, paced QRS duration of 110 ms, and bipolar stimulation to QRS end of 136 ms. After a month, echocardiography found improved LVEF (53%) and N-terminal Pro-B-Type natriuretic peptide was decreased from 1011 to 645 pg/mL. The patient was relieved from dyspnea. We report a case that PICM was resolved after LBBAP. LBBAP could be a rescue therapy for PICM induced by conventional RVa pacing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kwon et al. (2023) conducted a case report in Pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (n=1). Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) vs. Right ventricular apex pacing (prior state) was evaluated on Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Left bundle branch area pacing improved left ventricular ejection fraction from 35% to 53% and resolved heart failure symptoms in a patient with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: