Paced QRS morphology mimicking complete left bundle branch block induced by right ventricular pacing is associated with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy.

INTRODUCTION: Right ventricular (RV) pacing sometimes causes left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction, also known as pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM). However, the association between specifically paced QRS morphology and PICM development has not been elucidated. This study aimed to investigate the association between paced QRS mimicking a complete left bundle branch block (CLBBB) and PICM development. METHODS: We retrospectively screened 2009 patients who underwent pacemaker implantation from 2010 to 2020 in seven institutions. Patients who received pacemakers for an advanced atrioventricular block or bradycardia with atrial fibrillation, baseline LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 50%, and echocardiogram recorded at least 6 months postimplantation were included. The paced QRS recorded immediately after implantation was analyzed. A CLBBB-like paced QRS was defined as meeting the CLBBB criteria of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Foundation/Heart Rhythm Society in 2009. PICM was defined as a ≥10% LVEF decrease, resulting in an LVEF of <50%. RESULTS: Among the 270 patients analyzed, PICM was observed in 38. Baseline LVEF was lower in patients with PICM, and CLBBB-like paced QRS was frequently observed in PICM. Multivariate analysis revealed that low baseline LVEF (odds ratio [OR]: 0.93 per 1% increase, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89-0.98, p = 0.006) and CLBBB-like paced QRS (OR: 2.69, 95% CI: 1.25-5.76, p = 0.011) were significantly associated with PICM development. CONCLUSION: CLBBB-like paced QRS may be a novel risk factor for PICM. RV pacing, which causes CLBBB-like QRS morphology, may need to be avoided, and patients with CLBBB-like paced QRS should be followed-up carefully.

The association between paced left ventricular activation time and cardiac reverse remodeling in heart failure patients with left bundle branch block.

INTRODUCTION: The association between paced LVAT and cardiac structure and function at baseline, as well as whether longer LVAT is associated with worse cardiac reverse remodeling in patients with heart failure (HF) and left bundle branch block (LBBB) has not been well investigated. The purpose of this study is to investigate the association between paced LVAT and baseline echocardiographic parameters and cardiac reverse remodeling at follow-up. METHODS: Patients with HF and LBBB receiving successful left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) from June 2018 to April 2023 were enrolled and grouped based on paced LVAT. NT-proBNP and echocardiographic parameters were recorded during routine follow-up. The relationships between paced LVAT and echocardiographic parameters at baseline and follow-up were analyzed. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were enrolled (48 males, aged 65 ± 9.8, mean LVEF 32.1 ± 7.5%, mean LVEDD 63.0 ± 8.5 mm, median NT-proBNP 1057[513-3158] pg/mL). The paced QRSd was significantly decreased (177 ± 17.9 vs. 134 ± 18.5, p < .001) and median paced LVAT was 80[72-88] ms. After a median follow-up of 12[9-29] months, LVEF increased to 52.1 ± 11.2%, LVEDD decreased to 52.6 ± 8.8 mm, and NT-proBNP decreased to 215[73-532]pg/mL. Patients were grouped based on paced LVAT: LVAT < 80 ms (n = 39); 80 ≤ LVAT < 90 ms (n = 24); LVAT ≥ 90 ms (n = 20). Patients with longer LVAT had larger LVEDD and lower LVEF (LVEDDbaseline: p < .001; LVEFbaseline: p = .001). The difference in LVEF6M was statistically significant among groups (p < .001) and patients with longer LVAT had lower LVEF6M, while the difference in LVEF1Y was not seen (p = .090). There was no significant correlation between ΔLVEF6M-baseline, ΔLVEF1Y-6M and LVAT respectively (ΔLVEF6M-baseline: p = .261, r = -.126; ΔLVEF1Y-6M: p = .085, r = .218). CONCLUSION: Long paced LVAT was associated with worse echocardiographic parameters at baseline, but did not affect the cardiac reverse remodeling in patients with HF and LBBB. Those with longer LVAT required longer time to recover.

Predictors for new-onset conduction block in patients with pure native aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement with a new-generation self-expanding valve (VitaFlow Liberty™): a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: New-generation self-expanding valves can improve the success rate of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for severe pure native aortic regurgitation (PNAR). However, predictors of new-onset conduction block post-TAVR using new-generation self-expanding valves in patients with PNAR remain to be established. Therefore, this study aimed to identify predictors of new-onset conduction block post-TAVR using new-generation self-expanding valves (VitaFlow Liberty™) in patients with PNAR. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients were categorized into pacemaker and non-pacemaker groups based on their need for new postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI). Based on the postoperative presence of either new-onset complete left bundle branch block (cLBBB) or high-grade atrioventricular block (AVB), patients were further classified into conduction disorder and non-conduction disorder groups. Laboratory, echocardiographic, computed tomography, preoperative and postoperative electrocardiography, and procedural and clinical data were collected immediately after TAVR and during hospitalization and compared between the groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed incorporating the significant variables from the univariate analyses. RESULTS: This study examined 68 consecutive patients with severe PNAR who underwent TAVR. In 20 patients, a permanent pacemaker was fitted postoperatively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed an association between the need for postoperative PPI and preoperative complete right bundle branch block (cRBBB) or first-degree AVB, as well as a non-tubular left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT). In addition, valve implantation depth and angle of aortic root were independent predictors of new-onset cLBBB or high-grade AVB developing post-TAVR. The predictive value of valve implantation depth and angle of aortic root was further supported by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis results. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PNAR undergoing TAVR using self-expanding valves, preoperative cRBBB or first-degree AVB and a non-tubular LVOT were indicators of a higher likelihood of PPI requirement. Moreover, deeper valve implantation depth and greater angle of aortic root may be independent risk factors for new-onset cLBBB or high-grade AVB post-TAVR. Valve implantation depth and angle of aortic root values may be used to predict the possibility of new cLBBB or high-grade AVB post-TAVR.

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients with left bundle branch block.

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are commonly coexisting conditions. The impact of LBBB on catheter ablation of AF has not been well determined. This study aims to explore the long-term outcomes of patients with AF and LBBB after catheter ablation. METHODS: Forty-two patients with LBBB of 11,752 patients who underwent catheter ablation of AF from 2011 to 2020 were enrolled as LBBB group. After propensity score matching in a 1:4 ratio, 168 AF patients without LBBB were enrolled as non-LBBB group. Late recurrence and a composite endpoint of stroke, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular hospitalization were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Late recurrence rate was significantly higher in the LBBB group than that in the non-LBBB group (54.8% vs. 31.5%, p = .034). Multivariate analysis showed that LBBB was an independent risk factor for late recurrence after catheter ablation of AF (hazard ratio [HR] 2.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-4.40, p = .031). LBBB group was also associated with a significantly higher incidence of the composite endpoint (21.4% vs. 6.5%, HR 3.98, 95% CI 1.64-9.64, p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: LBBB was associated with a higher risk for late recurrence and a higher incidence of composite endpoint in the patients underwent catheter ablation.

Value of q waves in lateral and left precordial leads in patients with left bundle branch block to predict the response to cardiac resynchronization therapy.

BACKGROUND: The cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) non-response rate can reach 30% in heart failure (HF) patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB). This study aimed to evaluate the value of baseline q waves in leads I, V5, or V6 in predicting response to CRT in patients with HF and LBBB. METHODS: Patients with HF (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%) and LBBB receiving CRT implantation were retrospectively enrolled. Baseline characteristics and electrocardiogram parameters, including lateral and left precordial q waves were evaluated. Non-response to CRT was defined as the improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 5% at a 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 132 patients (mean age 63.0 ± 10.4 years, 94 [71.2%] male) were included. Among them, 32 patients with q waves in leads I, V5, or V6 were classified into the qLBBB (+) group, and the rest without q waves in these leads were defined as the qLBBB (-) group. The CRT non-response rate in the qLBBB (+) group was markedly higher than that in the qLBBB (-) group (68.8% vs. 33.3%, p < .001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that the presence of baseline q waves in leads I, V5, or V6 remained significantly associated with a higher rate of CRT non-response in patients with HF and LBBB (odds ratio: 4.8, 95% confidence interval: 1.5-15.0, p = .007). CONCLUSION: Any q wave in leads I, V5, or V6 was an independent predictive factor for CRT non-response in patients with HF and LBBB.

Successful prediction of left bundle branch block-induced cardiomyopathy and treatment effect by artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram.

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) induced cardiomyopathy is an increasingly recognized disease entity.  However, no clinical testing has been shown to be able to predict such an occurrence. CASE REPORT: A 70-year-old male with a prior history of LBBB with preserved ejection fraction (EF) and no other known cardiovascular conditions presented with presyncope, high-grade AV block, and heart failure with reduced EF (36%). His coronary angiogram was negative for any obstructive disease. No other known etiologies for cardiomyopathy were identified. Artificial intelligence-enabled ECGs performed 6 years prior to clinical presentation consistently predicted a high probability (up to 91%) of low EF. The patient successfully underwent left bundle branch area (LBBA) pacing with correction of the underlying LBBB. Subsequent AI ECGs showed a large drop in the probability of low EF immediately after LBBA pacing to 47% and then to 3% 2 months post procedure. His heart failure symptoms markedly improved and EF normalized to 54% at the same time. CONCLUSIONS: Artificial intelligence-enabled ECGS may help identify patients who are at risk of developing LBBB-induced cardiomyopathy and predict the response to LBBA pacing.

Different methods of 3D QRS area calculation from vectorcardiographic X, Y, and Z Leads.

3DQRSarea is a strong marker for cardiac resynchronization therapy and can be obtained by taking the (i) summation or the (ii) difference of the areas subtended by positive and negative deflections in X, Y, Z vectorcardiographic electrocardiogram (ECG) leads. We correlated both methods with the instantaneous-absolute-3D-voltage-time-integral (VTIQRS-3D). 3DQRSarea consistently underestimated the VTIQRS -3D, but the summation method was a closer and more reliable approximation. The dissimilarity was less apparent in left bundle branch block (r2 summation .996 vs. difference .972) and biventricular paced ECGs (r2 .996 vs. .957) but was more apparent in normal ECGs (r2 .988 vs. .653).

Predictors of functional mitral regurgitation improvement in patients with left bundle branch block treated with left bundle branch area pacing.

BACKGROUND: Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) and its severity are associated with adverse outcomes in heart failure patients. This study aims to analyze the predictors of FMR improvement after successful left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) in patients with LVEF < 50% and complete left bundle branch block (CLBBB). METHODS: Consecutive patients with LVEF < 50% and CLBBB who underwent successful LBBAP from July 2018 to July 2023 were retrospectively identified. Significant MR was defined as regurgitation of moderate severity or greater. Patients with significant FMR were included in the analysis. FMR improvement (FMRI) was defined as a reduction of at least one grade in regurgitation severity compared to baseline at 3 months or longer follow-up. RESULTS: Among the 81 identified patients, 42 patients with significant FMR preoperatively were included. After LBBAP, QRS duration significantly shortened from 170.6 ± 18.8 ms to 114.5 ± 20.2 ms (p < .001). Significant FMR improves in approximately 76.2%, and the patients were divided into an FMRI group (n = 32) and a non-FMRI group (n = 10). Univariate analysis showed that absence of persistent atrial fibrillation, typical CLBBB, and left atrium diameter at baseline were associated with improvement of FMR after LBBAP. Of these variables, only absence of persistent atrial fibrillation remains an independent predictor in the multivariate model (OR 12.436, p = .009). CONCLUSION: LBBAP is able to improve FMR in heart failure patients who had CLBBB with LVEF < 50%. Meanwhile, the absence of persistent atrial fibrillation is an independent predictor of FMR improvement.

Parameter subset reduction for imaging-based digital twin generation of patients with left ventricular mechanical discoordination.

BACKGROUND: Integration of a patient's non-invasive imaging data in a digital twin (DT) of the heart can provide valuable insight into the myocardial disease substrates underlying left ventricular (LV) mechanical discoordination. However, when generating a DT, model parameters should be identifiable to obtain robust parameter estimations. In this study, we used the CircAdapt model of the human heart and circulation to find a subset of parameters which were identifiable from LV cavity volume and regional strain measurements of patients with different substrates of left bundle branch block (LBBB) and myocardial infarction (MI). To this end, we included seven patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and LBBB (study ID: 2018-0863, registration date: 2019-10-07), of which four were non-ischemic (LBBB-only) and three had previous MI (LBBB-MI), and six narrow QRS patients with MI (MI-only) (study ID: NL45241.041.13, registration date: 2013-11-12). Morris screening method (MSM) was applied first to find parameters which were important for LV volume, regional strain, and strain rate indices. Second, this parameter subset was iteratively reduced based on parameter identifiability and reproducibility. Parameter identifiability was based on the diaphony calculated from quasi-Monte Carlo simulations and reproducibility was based on the intraclass correlation coefficient ( ICC ) obtained from repeated parameter estimation using dynamic multi-swarm particle swarm optimization. Goodness-of-fit was defined as the mean squared error ( χ 2 ) of LV myocardial strain, strain rate, and cavity volume. RESULTS: A subset of 270 parameters remained after MSM which produced high-quality DTs of all patients ( χ 2 < 1.6), but minimum parameter reproducibility was poor ( ICC min = 0.01). Iterative reduction yielded a reproducible ( ICC min = 0.83) subset of 75 parameters, including cardiac output, global LV activation duration, regional mechanical activation delay, and regional LV myocardial constitutive properties. This reduced subset produced patient-resembling DTs ( χ 2 < 2.2), while septal-to-lateral wall workload imbalance was higher for the LBBB-only DTs than for the MI-only DTs (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: By applying sensitivity and identifiability analysis, we successfully determined a parameter subset of the CircAdapt model which can be used to generate imaging-based DTs of patients with LV mechanical discoordination. Parameters were reproducibly estimated using particle swarm optimization, and derived LV myocardial work distribution was representative for the patient's underlying disease substrate. This DT technology enables patient-specific substrate characterization and can potentially be used to support clinical decision making.

Left bundle branch block cardiomyopathy (LBBB-CMP): from the not-so-benign finding of idiopathic LBBB to LBBB-CMP diagnosis and treatment.

Introduction Idiopathic left bundle branch block (iLBBB) is an uncommon finding. Its benignity has been increasingly questioned, though its natural history remains poorly clarified. Similarly, LBBB-cardiomyopathy (LBBB-CM) has been also increasingly recognized as a distinct entity, where electromechanical dyssynchrony seems to play a central role in left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) development. Still, it remains a scarcely studied topic. There is an urgent need for investigation and evidence reinforcement in these areas. OBJECTIVES: two main objectives: (1) to explore the natural history of "asymptomatic" iLBBB carriers; (2) to characterize the outcomes and therapeutic approach used in a "real-world" cohort of possible LBBB-CMP patients (pts). METHODS: tertiary care centre retrospective study of pts with iLBBB and possible LBBB-CMP, screened from a large hospital electrocardiographic database from 2011 to 2017 (LBBB = 347). To assign the 1st objective, only pts with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 50% and available follow-up (FU) data were included (n = 152). Regarding the 2nd objective, possible LBBB-CMP pts were selected and defined as iLBBB pts with LVD (LVEF < 50%) and no secondary causes for LVD (n = 53). Data were based on pts' careful review of medical records. RESULTS: focusing our 1st objective, 152 iLBBB carriers were identified. Median FU time were 8 years, and 61% were female. During FU, approximately 25% developed LVD, 20% needed ≥ 1 cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization, and 15% needed a cardiac device implantation. The majority (2/3) of pts with LVD on FU (n = 35) had no secondary causes for LVD, being classified as possible LBBB-CMP pts. Time-to-LVD analysis showed no differences between pts with a known cause for LVD vs LBBB-CMP pts (Log-rank = 0.713). Concerning the 2nd objective, 53 possible LBBB-CMP pts were identified. Median FU time were 10 years, and 51% were female. During the FU, 77% presented heart failure (HF) symptoms, and 42% needed ≥ 1 CV hospitalization, mainly due to HF. Half presented severe LVD at some point in time, and 55% needed a cardiac device, most of them a cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device. Comparing CRT with non-CRT pts, no differences were found in terms of medical therapy, but better outcomes were observed in CRT group: LVEF improvement was higher (median LVEF improvement of 11% in non-CRT vs 27% in CRT; p < 0.001), and fully recovery from LVD was more frequent (50% of CRT vs 14% non-CRT; p = 0.028). CONCLUSION: our data strengthen current evidence on natural history of iLBBB, showing significant CV morbidity associated with the presence of iLBBB, and reinforces the need for a serial and proper FU of these carriers. Our data on "real-world" possible LBBB-CMP pts shows high rates of CV events, namely HF-related events, and supports the growing evidence pointing out CRT as this subgroup of pts' cornerstone of treatment. In conclusion, our work sheds additional light on these largely unknown topics and underlines the urgent need for larger and prospective studies addressing the identification of LVD development predictors in iLBBB carriers, as well as the establishment of diagnostic criteria and therapeutic approach for LBBB-CMP.

Effects of left bundle branch block on echocardiographic coronary flow assessment: A systematic review.

This systematic review investigates the diagnostic and prognostic utility of coronary flow reserve (CFR) assessment through echocardiography in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB), a condition known to complicate the clinical evaluation of coronary artery disease (CAD). The literature search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar, was guided by PRISMA standards up to March 2024, and yielded six observational studies that met inclusion criteria. These studies involved a diverse population of patients with LBBB, employing echocardiographic protocols to clarify the impact of LBBB on coronary flow dynamics. The findings emphasize the importance of CFR in stratifying cardiovascular risk and guiding clinical decision-making in patients with LBBB. Pooled results reveal that patients with LBBB and significant left anterior descending (LAD) artery stenosis exhibited a marked decrease in stress-peak diastolic velocity (MD = -19.03 [-23.58; -14.48] cm/s; p < .0001) and CFR (MD = -.60 [-.71; -.50]; p < .0001), compared to those without significant LAD lesions, suggesting the efficacy of stress echocardiography CFR assessment in the identification of clinically significant CAD among the LBBB population. This review highlights the clinical relevance of echocardiography CFR assessment as a noninvasive tool for evaluating CAD and stratifying risk in the presence of LBBB and underscores the need for standardized protocols in CFR measurement.

Association between left bundle branch block and ventricular septal mid-wall fibrosis in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: The left bundle branch block (LBBB) is associated with ventricular septal mid-wall fibrosis (SMF) in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). However, whether LBBB is also associated with SMF in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains unclear. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 210 patients with preserved LVEF (male, n = 116; female, n = 94; mean age, 44 ± 17 years). LBBB was defined as QRS duration ≥140 ms for men or ≥ 130 ms for women, QS or rS in V1-V2, mid-QRS notching or slurring in at least two leads (V1, V2, V5, V6, I, and aVL). SMF determined by late gadolinium-enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance was defined as stripe-like or patchy mid-myocardial hyper-enhancement in the interventricular septal segments. RESULTS: SMF was detected in 24.8% (52/210) of these patients. The proportion of patients with SMF with LBBB was higher than the proportion of patients with SMF without LBBB (58.3% vs. 20.4%; P < 0.001). In the forward multivariate logistic analysis, LBBB (OR, 4.399; 95% CI, 1.774-10.904; P = 0.001) and age (OR, 1.028; 95% CI, 1.006-1.051; P = 0.011) were independently associated with SMF. The presence of LBBB showed a sensitivity of 27%%, specificity of 94%, positive predictive value of 58%%, and negative predictive value of 80% for the detection of SMF. CONCLUSION: LBBB was significantly associated with SMF in hospitalized patients with preserved LVEF. Screening with a resting 12­lead ECG may help to identify patients who are at a high risk of the presence of SMF.

A novel approach for developing left bundle branch pacing and left bundle branch block in a canine model.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) has shown the benefits in the treatment of dyssynchronous heart failure (HF). The purpose of this study was to develop a novel approach for LBBP and left bundle branch block (LBBB) in a canine model. METHODS: A "triangle-center" method by tricuspid valve annulus angiography for LBBP implantation was performed in 6 canines. A catheter was then applied for retrograde His potential recording and left bundle branch (LBB) ablation simultaneously. The conduction system was stained to verify the "triangle-center" method for LBBP and assess the locations of the LBB ablation site in relation to the left septal fascicle (LSF). RESULTS: The mean LBB potential to ventricular interval and stimulus-peak left ventricular activation time were 11.8 ± 1.2 and 35.7 ± 3.1 ms, respectively. The average intrinsic QRS duration was 44.7 ± 4.7 ms. LBB ablation significantly prolonged the QRS duration (106.3 ± 8.3 ms, p < .001) while LBBP significantly shortened the LBBB-QRS duration to 62.5 ± 5.3 ms (p < .001). After 6 weeks of follow-up, both paced QRS duration (63.0 ± 5.4 ms; p = .203) and LBBB-QRS duration (107.3 ± 7.4 ms; p = .144) were unchanged when comparing to the acute phase, respectively. Anatomical analysis of 6 canine hearts showed that the LBBP lead-tip was all placed in LSF area. CONCLUSION: The new approach for LBBP and LBBB canine model was stable and feasible to simulate the clinical dyssynchrony and resynchronization. It provided a useful tool to investigate the basic mechanisms of underlying physiological pacing benefits.

Comparison of the relation of the ESC 2021 and ESC 2013 definitions of left bundle branch block with clinical and echocardiographic outcome in cardiac resynchronization therapy.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to investigate the impact of the 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline changes in left bundle branch block (LBBB) definition on cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) patient selection and outcomes. METHODS: The MUG (Maastricht, Utrecht, Groningen) registry, consisting of consecutive patients implanted with a CRT device between 2001 and 2015 was studied. For this study, patients with baseline sinus rhythm and QRS duration ≥ 130ms were eligible. Patients were classified according to ESC 2013 and 2021 guideline LBBB definitions and QRS duration. Endpoints were heart transplantation, LVAD implantation or mortality (HTx/LVAD/mortality) and echocardiographic response (LVESV reduction ≥15%). RESULTS: The analyses included 1.202, typical CRT patients. The ESC 2021 definition resulted in considerably less LBBB diagnoses compared to the 2013 definition (31.6% vs. 80.9%, respectively). Applying the 2013 definition resulted in significant separation of the Kaplan-Meier curves of HTx/LVAD/mortality (p < .0001). A significantly higher echocardiographic response rate was found in the LBBB compared to the non-LBBB group using the 2013 definition. These differences in HTx/LVAD/mortality and echocardiographic response were not found when applying the 2021 definition. CONCLUSION: The ESC 2021 LBBB definition leads to a considerably lower percentage of patients with baseline LBBB then the ESC 2013 definition. This does not lead to better differentiation of CRT responders, nor does this lead to a stronger association with clinical outcomes after CRT. In fact, stratification according to the 2021 definition is not associated with a difference in clinical or echocardiographic outcome, implying that the guideline changes may negatively influence CRT implantation practice with a weakened recommendation in patients that will benefit from CRT.

Effect of scar and His-Purkinje and myocardium conduction on response to conduction system pacing.

INTRODUCTION: Conduction system pacing (CSP), in the form of His bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch pacing (LBBP), is emerging as a valuable cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) delivery method. However, patient selection and therapy personalization for CSP delivery remain poorly characterized. We aim to compare pacing-induced electrical synchrony during CRT, HBP, LBBP, HBP with left ventricular (LV) epicardial lead (His-optimized CRT [HOT-CRT]), and LBBP with LV epicardial lead (LBBP-optimized CRT [LOT-CRT]) in patients with different conduction disease presentations using computational modeling. METHODS: We simulated ventricular activation on 24 four-chamber heart geometries, including His-Purkinje systems with proximal left bundle branch block (LBBB). We simulated septal scar, LV lateral wall scar, and mild and severe myocardium and LV His-Purkinje system conduction disease by decreasing the conduction velocity (CV) down to 70% and 35% of the healthy CV. Electrical synchrony was measured by the shortest interval to activate 90% of the ventricles (90% of biventricular activation time [BIVAT-90]). RESULTS: Severe LV His-Purkinje conduction disease favored CRT (BIVAT-90: HBP 101.5 ± 7.8 ms vs. CRT 93.0 ± 8.9 ms, p < .05), with additional electrical synchrony induced by HOT-CRT (87.6 ± 6.7 ms, p < .05) and LOT-CRT (73.9 ± 7.6 ms, p < .05). Patients with slow myocardium CV benefit more from CSP compared to CRT (BIVAT-90: CRT 134.5 ± 24.1 ms; HBP 97.1 ± 9.9 ms, p < .01; LBBP: 101.5 ± 10.7 ms, p < .01). Septal but not lateral wall scar made CSP ineffective, while CRT was able to resynchronize the ventricles in the presence of septal scar (BIVAT-90: baseline 119.1 ± 10.8 ms vs. CRT 85.1 ± 14.9 ms, p < .01). CONCLUSION: Severe LV His-Purkinje conduction disease attenuates the benefits of CSP, with additional improvements achieved with HOT-CRT and LOT-CRT. Septal but not lateral wall scars make CSP ineffective.

Conduction system versus biventricular pacing in heart failure with non-left bundle branch block.

INTRODUCTION: The benefits of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular pacing (BiV) is significantly lower when applied to heart failure (HF) patients with non-left bundle branch block (LBBB) conduction delay. We investigated clinical outcomes of conduction system pacing (CSP) for CRT in non-LBBB HF. METHODS: Consecutive HF patients with non-LBBB conduction delay undergoing CSP were propensity matched for age, sex, HF-etiology, and atrial fibrillation (AF) in a 1:1 ratio to BiV from a prospective registry of CRT recipients. Echocardiographic response was defined as an increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by ≥10%. The primary outcome was the composite of HF-hospitalizations or all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 96 patients were recruited (mean age 70 ± 11years, 22% female, 68% ischemic HF and 49% AF). Significant reductions in QRS duration and LV dimensions were seen only after CSP, while LVEF improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.05). Echocardiographic response occurred more frequently in CSP than BiV (51% vs. 21%, p < 0.01), with CSP independently associated with four-fold increased odds (adjusted odds ratio 4.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-12.41). The primary outcome occurred more frequently in BiV than CSP (69% vs. 27%, p < 0.001), with CSP independently associated with 58% risk reduction (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] 0.42, 95% CI 0.21-0.84, p = 0.01), driven by reduced all-cause mortality (AHR 0.22, 95% CI 0.07-0.68, p < 0.01), and a trend toward reduced HF-hospitalization (AHR 0.51, 95% CI 0.21-1.21, p = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: CSP provided greater electrical synchrony, reverse remodeling, improved cardiac function and survival compared to BiV in non-LBBB, and may be the preferred CRT strategy for non-LBBB HF.

Possible systolic fascicular potentials in patients with left bundle branch block undergoing left bundle branch area pacing: A case series.

INTRODUCTION: In left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), several methods allow determination of lead depth during active fixation inside the septum: among these, visualization of a Purkinje potential indicates that the subendocardial area has been reached. In LBB block (LBBB) patients, fascicular potentials are visible as presystolic only in rare conditions. METHODS AND RESULTS: Since October 2022 until August 2023, LBBAP was attempted in 21 patients with LBBB at our Center: among the 18 consecutive patients (86%) in which it was successful, focusing on the terminal part of the unipolar ventricular electrogram (VEGM) recorded in the LBBA (where fixation beats occurred and conduction system (CS) capture was confirmed), we always observed discrete high-frequency, low-amplitude signals during spontaneous rhythm with LBBB morphology, showing a consistent coupling with the QRS onset, falling in a portion of QRS interval ranging from 58% to 80% of its overall duration, and disappearing during pacing. As found in a recently published case report, these sharp signals could represent the activation of left ventricular CS fibers, occurring passively from the septal working myocardium, and thus appearing lately in the VEGM. CONCLUSION: The possibility of recognizing discrete high-frequency, low-amplitude signals within the terminal portion of the unipolar VEGM, possibly representing left CS potentials, even in patients with LBBB, may constitute a useful additional means to notice operators about having reached the LBBA, thus helping to avoid perforation in the left ventricle.

Right sided approach for left bundle branch pacing using lumen-less lead: Technical considerations and follow-up outcome.

INTRODUCTION: Left bundle branch pacing has gained significant momentum in the last few years. The procedure involves deploying the lead deep inside the interventricular septum through left subclavian vein. We aimed at analyzing the feasibility, efficacy and long-term outcome of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) using lumen-less lead through the right subclavian vein. METHODS: This was a retrospective-institutional, single center observational study done in consecutive patients who underwent LBBP using 3830 selectsecuretm lead. Left subclavian venous access was the primary strategy for lead implantation. Patients requiring right sided approach due to venous obstruction or persistent left superior-vena-cava (PLSVC) for LBBP were included in the study. RESULTS: Right sided approach was successful in 16 out of 19 (84%) attempted patients. C315-His catheter was used in all patients without modifying its curvature. PLSVC (n = 7), left venous obstruction (n = 7), right sided device upgradation (n = 1) and left pocket infection (n = 1) were the reasons for right sided approach. Mean follow-up duration was 17 ± 12 months. LBBP resulted in reduction in QRS duration from 137.3 ± 37.8 ms to 122.3 ± 9.5 ms (p -.13) and increase in LV ejection fraction from 46.2 ± 16.3% to 54.4 ± 11.6% (p -.11). The mean fluoroscopy duration and radiation dose were significantly high in right sided approach (n = 16) as compared to left sided approach (n = 293). In patients requiring cardiac-resynchronization therapy (CRT), right sided LBBP resulted in reduction in QRS duration from 171.8 ± 18.5 to 125.5 ± 11.9 ms (p -.0001) and increase in LVEF from 29.1 ± 3.8 to 45.1 ± 11.9% (p -.005). CONCLUSION: Right sided LBBP is feasible, safe and effective in patients requiring pacing for symptomatic bradyarrhythmia and CRT. Further development in dedicated tools for right-sided approach would help in reducing the fluoroscopy-duration and radiation-dose.

Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes with new-onset left bundle branch block after SAPIEN-3 transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: New-onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) can develop after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) resulting in worse outcomes. AIMS: Describe clinical and echocardiographic outcomes with new-onset LBBB after TAVR. METHODS: We included consecutive patients who underwent transfemoral-TAVR with SAPIEN-3 (S3) valve between April 2015 and December 2018. Exclusion criteria included pre-existing LBBB, right BBB, left anterior hemiblock, left posterior hemiblock, wide QRS ≥ 120ms, prior permanent pacemaker (PPM), and nontransfemoral access. RESULTS: Among 612 patients, 11.4% developed new-onset LBBB upon discharge. The length of stay was longer with new-onset LBBB compared with no LBBB [3 (2-5) days versus 2 (1-3) days; p < 0.001]. New-onset LBBB was associated with higher rates of 30-day PPM requirement (18.6% vs. 5.4%; p < 0.001) and 1-year heart failure hospitalizations (10.7% vs. 4.4%; p = 0.033). There was no difference in 3-year mortality between both groups (30.9% vs. 30.6%; p = 0.829). Further, new-onset LBBB was associated with lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at both 30 days (55.9 ± 11.4% vs. 59.3 ± 9%; p = 0.026) and 1 year (55 ± 12% vs. 60.1 ± 8.9%; p = 0.002). These changes were still present when we stratified patients according to baseline LVEF (≥50% or <50%). New-onset LBBBs were associated with a higher 1-year LV end-diastolic volume index (51.4 ± 18.6 vs. 46.4 ± 15.1 ml/m2 ; p = 0.036), and LV end-systolic volume index (23.2 ± 14.1 vs. 18.9 ± 9.7 ml/m2 ; p = 0.009). Compared with resolved new-onset LBBB, persistent new-onset LBBB was associated with worse LVEF and higher PPM at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: New-onset LBBB after S3 TAVR was associated with higher PPM requirement, worse LVEF, higher LV volumes, and increased heart failure hospitalizations, with no difference in mortality.

Hemodynamic forces from 4D flow magnetic resonance imaging predict left ventricular remodeling following cardiac resynchronization therapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block (LBBB) may receive cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), but current selection criteria are imprecise, and many patients have limited treatment response. Hemodynamic forces (HDF) have been suggested as a marker for CRT response. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate left ventricular (LV) HDF as a predictive marker for LV remodeling after CRT. METHODS: Patients with heart failure, EF < 35% and LBBB (n = 22) underwent CMR with 4D flow prior to CRT. LV HDF were computed in three directions using the Navier-Stokes equations, reported in median N [interquartile range], and the ratio of transverse/longitudinal HDF was calculated for systole and diastole. Transthoracic echocardiography was performed before and 6 months after CRT. Patients with end-systolic volume reduction ≥ 15% were defined as responders. RESULTS: Non-responders had smaller HDF than responders in the inferior-anterior direction in systole (0.06 [0.03] vs. 0.07 [0.03], p = 0.04), and in the apex-base direction in diastole (0.09 [0.02] vs. 0.1 [0.05], p = 0.047). Non-responders had larger diastolic HDF ratio compared to responders (0.89 vs. 0.67, p = 0.004). ROC analysis of diastolic HDF ratio for identifying CRT non-responders had AUC of 0.88 (p = 0.005) with sensitivity 57% and specificity 100% for ratio > 0.87. Intragroup comparison found higher HDF ratio in systole compared to diastole for responders (p = 0.003), but not for non-responders (p = 0.8). CONCLUSION: Hemodynamic force ratio is a potential marker for identifying patients with heart failure and LBBB who are unlikely to benefit from CRT. Larger-scale studies are required before implementation of HDF analysis into clinical practice.