Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison between conduction system pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy in right bundle branch block patients.
Strocchi, Marina; Gillette, Karli; Neic, Aurel; Elliott, Mark K; Wijesuriya, Nadeev; Mehta, Vishal; Vigmond, Edward J; Plank, Gernot; Rinaldi, Christopher A; Niederer, Steven A.
Afiliação
  • Strocchi M; School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Gillette K; BioTechMed-Graz, Graz, Austria.
  • Neic A; Gottfried Schatz Research Center, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
  • Elliott MK; NumeriCor GmbH, Graz, Austria.
  • Wijesuriya N; School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Mehta V; Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
  • Vigmond EJ; School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Plank G; Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
  • Rinaldi CA; School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Niederer SA; Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Front Physiol ; 13: 1011566, 2022.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36213223
ABSTRACT
A significant number of right bundle branch block (RBBB) patients receive cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), despite lack of evidence for benefit in this patient group. His bundle (HBP) and left bundle pacing (LBP) are novel CRT delivery methods, but their effect on RBBB remains understudied. We aim to compare pacing-induced electrical synchrony during conventional CRT, HBP, and LBP in RBBB patients with different conduction disturbances, and to investigate whether alternative ways of delivering LBP improve response to pacing. We simulated ventricular activation on twenty-four four-chamber heart geometries each including a His-Purkinje system with proximal right bundle branch block (RBBB). We simulated RBBB combined with left anterior and posterior fascicular blocks (LAFB and LPFB). Additionally, RBBB was simulated in the presence of slow conduction velocity (CV) in the myocardium, left ventricular (LV) or right ventricular (RV) His-Purkinje system, and whole His-Purkinje system. Electrical synchrony was measured by the shortest interval to activate 90% of the ventricles (BIVAT-90). Compared to baseline, HBP significantly improved activation times for RBBB alone (BIVAT-90 66.9 ± 5.5 ms vs. 42.6 ± 3.8 ms, p < 0.01), with LAFB (69.5 ± 5.0 ms vs. 58.1 ± 6.2 ms, p < 0.01), with LPFB (81.8 ± 6.6 ms vs. 62.9 ± 6.2 ms, p < 0.01), with slow myocardial CV (119.4 ± 11.4 ms vs. 97.2 ± 10.0 ms, p < 0.01) or slow CV in the whole His-Purkinje system (102.3 ± 7.0 ms vs. 75.5 ± 5.2 ms, p < 0.01). LBP was only effective in RBBB cases if combined with anodal capture of the RV septum myocardium (BIVAT-90 66.9 ± 5.5 ms vs. 48.2 ± 5.2 ms, p < 0.01). CRT significantly reduced activation times in RBBB in the presence of severely slow RV His-Purkinje CV (95.1 ± 7.9 ms vs. 84.3 ± 9.3 ms, p < 0.01) and LPFB (81.8 ± 6.6 ms vs. CRT 72.9 ± 8.6 ms, p < 0.01). Both CRT and HBP were ineffective with severely slow CV in the LV His-Purkinje system. HBP is effective in RBBB patients with otherwise healthy myocardium and Purkinje system, while CRT and LBP are ineffective. Response to LBP improves when LBP is combined with RV septum anodal capture. CRT is better than HBP only in patients with severely slow CV in the RV His-Purkinje system, while CV slowing of the whole His-Purkinje system and the myocardium favor HBP over CRT.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article