Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Left bundle branch potential predicts better electrical synchrony in bradycardia patients receiving left bundle branch pacing.
Huang, Jingjuan; Guo, Lina; Zhang, Weiwei; Li, Ruogu; He, Ben.
Afiliação
  • Huang J; Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 241 W Huaihai Rd, Shanghai, 200030, China.
  • Guo L; Department of Ultrasound, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 241 W Huaihai Rd, Shanghai, 200030, China.
  • Zhang W; Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 241 W Huaihai Rd, Shanghai, 200030, China.
  • Li R; Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 241 W Huaihai Rd, Shanghai, 200030, China. 13564565961@163.com.
  • He B; Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 241 W Huaihai Rd, Shanghai, 200030, China.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 22(1): 376, 2022 08 19.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35986250
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a novel physiological pacing technology. We aim to explore the relation between LBB potential (LBB Po) and left ventricular (LV) electrical/mechanical synchrony in bradycardia patients without heart failure (HF) receiving LBBP.

METHODS:

A total of 62 patients undergoing LBBP were categorized by LBB Po the LBB Po positive (+) group and the LBB Po negative (-) group. The perioperative electrocardiographic and echocardiography parameters related to cardiac synchrony were analyzed.

RESULTS:

There were 42 (67.74%) patients in the LBB Po (+) group and 20 patients in the LBB Po (-) group. Paced QRS duration (113.50 ± 17.65 ms vs. 123.40 ± 13.18 ms, P = 0.031) and stimulus left ventricular activation time (71.76 ± 3.53 ms vs. 74.45 ± 3.12 ms, P = 0.005) were shorter in the LBB Po (+) group than in the LBB Po (-) group. No significant differences in the LV mechanical synchrony (Ts-SD-12, 36.55 ± 19.76 vs. 39.95 ± 16.04, P = 0.505; PSD, 51.14 ± 17.69 vs. 45.65 ± 10.55, P = 0.205) between the two groups. There was not statistically difference in ventricular lead parameters measured intraoperative between the two groups. Compared with the LBB Po (-) group, the LBB Po (+) group showed a dramatically higher total procedure duration time (93.52 ± 9.18 min vs. 86.25 ± 10.54 min, p = 0.007) and fluoroscopy time for ventricle lead implantation (18.95 ± 3.43 min vs. 14.00 ± 3.16 min, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS:

The appearance of LBB Po may suggest better electrical synchrony during LBBP, but similar in LV mechanical synchrony. However, the total operation duration and fluoroscopy time of ventricular lead implantation in the LBB Po (+) group were longer. Therefore, it may be unnecessary to deliberately recognize the LBB Po when it is difficult to detect LBB Po and meet the LBBP criterion.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Bradicardia / Fascículo Atrioventricular Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Bradicardia / Fascículo Atrioventricular Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article