Rapid reversal of right ventricular pacing-induced cardiomyopathy by His bundle pacing.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Thosani AJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5532750 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Rapid reversal of right ventricular pacing-induced cardiomyopathy by His bundle pacing.
Thosani Amit J AJ Liu Emerson E Shaw George G Belden William W Chenarides John J
HeartRhythm case reports 20170124 3
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMetabolic disorder is noted for pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. The benefits of His bundle pacing over right ventricular (RV) pacing in preventing pacing-induced cardiomyopathy from a metabolic perspective are yet to be fully understood.Method and resultsThree pig groups were established for this study: sham control, RV pacing (RV pacing for 6 months), and His pacing (RV pacing for 6 months, followed by His bundle pacing for 3 months). Complete atrioventricular block was created in the last 2 groups. Left ventricular function and dyssynchrony were assessed via echocardiography, while proteins linked to metabolism, endoplasmic reticulum stress, and inflammation in left ventricular myocardium were examined. The RV pacing group had significantly more left ventricular mechanical dyssynchrony compared with the other groups. The RV pacing group exhibited triglyceride and diacylglycerol accumulation in cardiomyocytes and higher expression of binding immunoglobulin protein and tumor necrosis factor-α than the other groups. Additionally, the expression of CD36 was activated, while the expression of hormone-sensitive lipase was downregulated in the RV pacing group compared with the His pacing and sham control groups. Furthermore, the expressions of GLUT4 and pyruvate dehydrogenase were higher in the RV pacing group than the sham control and His pacing groups. Notably, the abnormal fatty acid and glucose metabolic pathways in the left ventricular myocardium during RV pacing could be corrected by His bundle pacing.ConclusionsHis bundle pacing can mitigate the abnormal metabolism disorders, endoplasmic reticulum stress, and inflammation induced during RV pacing and may contribute to the superiority of conduction system pacing over RV pacing in reducing heart failure hospitalization.
| S-EPMC11010098 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHis bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) emerge as better alternatives to right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP) in patients with bradycardia requiring permanent cardiac pacing. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of LBBAP, HBP, and RVAP in Japanese patients with bradycardia.MethodsA total of 424 patients who underwent successful pacemaker implantation (HBP, n = 53; LBBAP, n = 75; and RVAP, n = 296) were retrospectively enrolled in this study. The primary study endpoint was the cumulative incidence of heart failure hospitalization (HFH) during the follow-up.ResultsThe success rate for implantation was higher in the LBBAP group than in the HBP group (94.9% and 81.5%, respectively). Capture threshold increase >1V during the follow-up occurred in the HBP and RVAP groups (9.4% and 5.1%, respectively), while it did not in the LBBAP group. The cumulative incidence of HFH was significantly lower in the LBBAP group than the RVAP (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.12 [95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.86]; p = .034); it did not differ between the HBP and RVAP groups (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.48 [95% confidence interval: 0.17-1.34]; p = .16). Advanced age, mean percent right ventricular pacing (per 10% increase), left ventricular ejection fraction <50%, and RVAP were associated with HFH.ConclusionsCompared to RVAP and HBP, LBBAP appeared more feasible and effective in patients with bradycardia requiring permanent cardiac pacing.
| S-EPMC10995588 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesLeft bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has developed as a strategy for patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM). We aimed to compare the upgrade effectiveness between LBBAP and traditional biventricular pacing (BVP) in PICM patients.MethodsConsecutive PICM patients with successful device upgrades were enrolled. The primary outcome was the echocardiographic response, defined as absolute left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement ≥5% at 6-month follow up.ResultsA total of 92 patients were included. 61 underwent BVP and 31 underwent LBBAP. The median RVP burden was 96.8% (IQR: 93.0-99.0%). LBBAP achieved a shorter paced QRS duration (QRSd) compared with BVP (145.9 ± 22.4 ms vs. 157.5 ± 26.5 ms; p =.031). At 6 months, LBBAP had a higher echocardiographic response rate than BVP (67.7% vs. 39.3%, p =.019). LVEF increased from 37.8% ± 9.2% to 44.8% ± 10.2% (p <.001) in LBBAP compared with an improvement from 35.7% ± 8.9% to 38.2% ± 12.1% (p <.01) in BVP, with significantly greater change from baseline in LBBAP (7.0% ± 7.0% vs. 2.5% ± 8.7%; p =.024). Narrower pacing QRS after upgrade was associated with better echocardiographic response only in LBBAP but not in BVP. (P for interaction <.05). Both groups had similar rates of composite clinical outcome.ConclusionLBBAP improved echocardiographic response compared with BVP in PICM patients. The superior efficacy of LBBAP in reverse remodeling was dependent on improved electrical synchrony.
| S-EPMC11822657 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough right ventricular pacing (RVP) is recommended by most of the guidelines for atrioventricular block, it can cause electrical and mechanical desynchrony, impair left ventricular function, and increase the risk of atrial fibrillation. Recently, the His-Purkinje system pacing, including His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch pacing (LBBP), has emerged as a physiological pacing modality. However, few studies have compared their efficacy and safety in atrioventricular block (AVB).Methods and resultsThe PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect databases were searched for observational studies and randomized trials of patients with atrioventricular block requiring permanent pacing, from database inception until 10 January 2022. The primary outcomes were complications and heart failure hospitalization. The secondary outcomes included changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), pacing parameters, procedure duration, and success rate. After extracting the data at baseline and the longest follow-up duration available, a pairwise meta-analysis and a Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis were performed. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) or 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, whereas mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs or 95% CrIs were calculated for continuous outcomes. Seven studies and 1,069 patients were included. Overall, 43.4% underwent LBBP, 33.5% HBP, and 23.1% RVP. Compared with RVP, LBBP and HBP were associated with a shorter paced QRS duration and a more preserved LVEF. HBP significantly increased the pacing threshold and reduced the R-wave amplitude. There was no difference in the risk of complications or the implant success rate. The pacing threshold remained stable during follow-up for the three pacing modalities. The pacing impedance was significantly reduced in HBP, while a numerical but non-significant pacing impedance decrease was observed in both LBBP and RVP. LBBP was associated with an increased R-wave amplitude during follow-up.ConclusionIn this systematic review and network meta-analysis, HBP and LBBP were superior to RVP in paced QRS duration and preservation of LVEF for patients with atrioventricular block. LBBP was associated with a lower pacing threshold and a greater R-wave amplitude than HBP. However, the stability of the pacing output of LBBP may be a concern. Further investigation of the long-term efficacy in left ventricular function and the risk of heart failure hospitalization is needed.Systematic review registration[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=315046], identifier [CRD42022315046].
| S-EPMC9640391 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A 70-year-old male with prior orthotopic heart transplant developed left bundle branch block followed by new-onset left ventricular systolic dysfunction. He underwent His bundle pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy with complete normalization of his ejection fraction. This is the first reported case of left bundle branch block-induced cardiomyopathy in a transplanted heart. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.).
| S-EPMC8299132 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6475060 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cardiac dyssynchrony is the proposed mechanism for pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy, which can be prevented by biventricular pacing. Left bundle branch pacing and His bundle pacing are novel interventions that imitate the natural conduction of the heart with, theoretically, less interventricular dyssynchrony. One of the surrogate markers of interventricular synchrony is QRS duration. Our study aimed to compare the change of QRS duration before and after implantation between types of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs): left bundle branch pacing versus His bundle pacing versus biventricular pacing and conventional right ventricular pacing. A literature search for studies that reported an interval change of QRS duration after CIED implantation was conducted utilizing the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. All relevant works from database inception through November 2020 were included in this analysis. A random-effects model, Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to analyze QRS duration changes (eg, electrical cardiac synchronization) across different CIED implantations. The mean study sample size, from 14 included studies, was 185 subjects. The search found 707 articles. After exclusions, 14 articles remained with 2,054 patients. The His bundle pacing intervention resulted in the most dramatic decline in QRS duration (mean difference, - 53 ms; 95% CI - 67, - 39), followed by left bundle branch pacing (mean difference, - 46 ms; 95% CI - 60, - 33), and biventricular pacing (mean difference, - 19 ms; 95% CI - 37, - 1.8), when compared to conventional right ventricle apical pacing. When compared between LBBP and HBP, showed no statistically significant wider QRS duration in LBBP with mean different 6.5 ms. (95% CI - 6.7, 21). Our network meta-analysis found that physiologic pacing has the greatest effect on QRS duration after implantation. Thus, HBP and LBBP showed no significant difference between QRS duration after implantation. Physiologic pacing interventions result in improved electrocardiography markers of cardiac synchrony, narrower QRS duration, and might lower electromechanical dyssynchrony.
| S-EPMC8190182 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is emerging evidence for the potential utility of left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), as an alternative to conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The utility of right ventriculography by way of power injector to facilitate lead placement has not yet been reported in the literature.Case summaryA 79-year-old female, with a background of poorly rate-controlled atrial fibrillation, presented with worsening dyspnoea. She had recently undergone single-chamber pacemaker insertion prior to an atrioventricular nodal (AVN) ablation, owing to failure in achieving successful CRT coronary sinus lead placement. She had clinical evidence of volume overload, and her electrocardiogram demonstrated right ventricular pacing. Echocardiography demonstrated left ventricular (LV) impairment, with an ejection fraction (EF) of 35%, and severe functional mitral regurgitation (MR). Her diagnosis was overall consistent with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PIC). In this patient, the use of right ventriculography, using power-injector-delivered contrast, successfully facilitated placement of an LBBAP lead, with confirmation of good threshold and sensing parameters. Following an upgrade to conduction system pacing, the patient recovered well. On recent follow-up, repeat echocardiography (24 months post initial presentation) demonstrated improved LV function (EF 45% from 35%) and only mild-to-moderate MR.DiscussionIn conclusion, we demonstrate the utility of right ventriculography to facilitate placement of an LBBAP lead, successfully treating a patient who developed PIC from chronic right ventricular pacing following AVN ablation.
| S-EPMC11443961 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHis bundle pacing (HBP) has emerged as an alternative site to right ventricular pacing (RVP) with encouraging outcomes. To date, no study has investigated the systematic approach of three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping (3D-EAM) to guide HBP implantation and to evaluate myocardial activation timing. Furthermore, studies reporting a comprehensive assessment of the ventricular function, using myocardial work (MW) evaluation are lacking.Objectives(1) To evaluate the systematic use of the 3D-EAM as a guide to HBP; (2) to assess the electrical and mechanical activations with high-density mapping, comparing spontaneous ventricular activation (SVA), HBP and RVP; (3) to assess the myocardial function through speckle-tracking echocardiography (STE) and MW analysis in SVA, HBP and RVP.Methods3D-EAM was performed in consecutive patients undergoing HBP implantation with a low use of fluoroscopy. All patients were systematically evaluated with high-density mapping, MW and STE.ResultsFifteen patients were enrolled, of whom three had an implant failure (20%). RV activation time was not statistically different between SVA and HBP (103 vs. 104 ms, p = 0.969) but was significantly higher in RVP (133 ms, p = 0.011 vs. SVA and p = 0.001 vs HBP). Global constructive work was significantly lower during RVP (1191 mmHg%) than during SVA and HBP (1648 and 1505 mmHg%, p = 0.011 and p = 0.008, respectively) and did not differ between SVA and HBP (p = 0.075).Conclusions3D-EAM and MW evaluation showed that HBP was comparable to the physiological SVA in terms of activation time and cardiac performance. Compared to both SVA and HBP, RVP was associated with a worse activation timing and ventricular efficiency.
| S-EPMC9698308 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLong-term RVP could bring adverse problems to cardiac electro-mechanics and result in inter- and intra-ventricular asynchrony, impaired labor force, and aggravation of cardiac function. HBRP including direct His bundle pacing and para-His bundle pacing was regarded as a novel physiological pacing pattern to avoid devastating cardiac function. This synthetic study was conducted to integratively and quantitatively evaluate the efficacy of His bundle related pacing (HBRP) in comparison with conventional right ventricular pacing (RVP).MethodsPublished studies on comparison of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end diastolic volume (LVEDV), left ventricular end systolic volume (LVESV), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, inter-ventricular asynchrony, and QRS duration, etc. between HBRP and RVP were collected and for meta-analysis.ResultsHBRP showed higher LVEF (WMD = 3.9%, 95% CI: 1.6% - 6.1%), lower NYHA class (WMD = -0.5, 95% CI: -0.7 - -0.3), WMD of LVESV = -0.1 ml, 95% CI: -3.0 - 2.8 ml), less inter-ventricular asynchrony (WMD = -13.2 ms, 95% CI: -16.4 - -10.0 ms), and shorter QRS duration for long-term (WMD = -36.9 ms, 95% CI: -40.0 - -33.8 ms), however, no significant difference of ventricular volume (WMDLVEDV = -2.4 ml, 95% CI: -5.0 - 0.2 ml; WMDLVESV = -0.1 ml, 95% CI: -3.0 - 2.8 ml) compared to RVP.ConclusionsThe efficacy of HBRP was firstly verified by meta-analysis to date. Compared with RVP, HBRP markedly preserve LVEF, NYHA class, and QRS duration. However, it seemed to have less effect on ventricular volume.
| S-EPMC5553603 | biostudies-literature