Comparison of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing and Biventricular Pacing in Candidates for Resynchronization Therapy

Pugazhendhi Vijayaraman*, Parikshit S. Sharma, Oscar Cano, Shunmuga Sundaram Ponnusamy, Bengt Herweg, Francesco Zanon, Marek Jastrzebski, Jiangang Zou, Mihail G. Chelu, Kevin Vernooy, Zachary I. Whinnett, Girish M. Nair, Manuel Molina-Lerma, Karol Curila, Dipen Zalavadia, Abdul Haseeb, Cicely Dye, Sharath C. Vipparthy, Ryan Brunetti, Pawel MoskalAlexandra Ross, Antonius van Stipdonk, Jerin George, Yusuf K. Qadeer, Mishal Mumtaz, Jeffrey Kolominsky, Syeda A. Zahra, Mehrdad Golian, Lina Marcantoni, Faiz A. Subzposh, Kenneth A. Ellenbogen

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

BACKGROUND Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular pacing (BVP) is a well established therapy in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), heart failure, and wide QRS or expected frequent ven-tricular pacing. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has recently been shown to be a safe alternative to BVP.OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes between BVP and LBBAP among patients undergoing CRT. METHODS This observational study included patients with LVEF #35% who underwent BVP or LBBAP for the first time for Class I or II indications for CRT from January 2018 to June 2022 at 15 international centers. The primary outcome was the composite endpoint of time to death or heart failure hospitalization (HFH). Secondary outcomes included endpoints of death, HFH, and echocardiographic changes.RESULTS A total of 1,778 patients met inclusion criteria: 981 BVP, 797 LBBAP. The mean age was 69 & PLUSMN; 12 years, 32% were female, 48% had coronary artery disease, and mean LVEF was 27% & PLUSMN; 6%. Paced QRS duration in LBBAP was significantly narrower than baseline (128 & PLUSMN; 19 ms vs 161 & PLUSMN; 28 ms; P < 0.001) and significantly narrower compared to BVP (144 & PLUSMN; 23 ms; P < 0.001). Following CRT, LVEF improved from 27% & PLUSMN; 6% to 41% & PLUSMN; 13% (P < 0.001) with LBBAP compared with an increase from 27% & PLUSMN; 7% to 37% & PLUSMN; 12% (P < 0.001) with BVP, with significantly greater change from baseline with LBBAP (13% & PLUSMN; 12% vs 10% & PLUSMN; 12%; P < 0.001). On multivariable regression analysis, the primary outcome was significantly reduced with LBBAP compared with BVP (20.8% vs 28%; HR: 1.495; 95% CI: 1.213-1.842; P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS LBBAP improved clinical outcomes compared with BVP in patients with CRT indications and may be a reasonable alternative to BVP. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2023;82:228-241) & COPY; 2023 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)228-241
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume82
Issue number3
Early online date1 Jul 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 18 Jul 2023

Keywords

  • biventricular pacing
  • cardiac resynchronization therapy
  • heart failure hospitalization
  • left bundle branch area pacing
  • mortality
  • CARDIAC-RESYNCHRONIZATION
  • HEART-FAILURE

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing and Biventricular Pacing in Candidates for Resynchronization Therapy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this