Evaluating electrical stability in left bundle branch area pacing for bradycardia patients at follow-up

Background: Physiologic pacing is safe and feasible, but whether electrical synchrony persists at follow-up in patients undergoing left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is unknown. Objective: To determine performance of electrical synchrony in LBBAP patients at follow-up. Methods: Consecutive patie...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sem Briongos-Figuero, MD, PhD, Álvaro Estévez Paniagua, MD, PhD, Manuel Tapia Martínez, MD, Silvia Jiménez Loeches, MD, Ana Sánchez Hernández, MD, Delia Heredero Palomo, RN, Elena Sánchez López, RN, Arantxa Luna Cabadas, RN, Roberto Muñoz-Aguilera, MD, PhD
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2025-05-01
Series:Heart Rhythm O2
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666501825000765
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background: Physiologic pacing is safe and feasible, but whether electrical synchrony persists at follow-up in patients undergoing left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is unknown. Objective: To determine performance of electrical synchrony in LBBAP patients at follow-up. Methods: Consecutive patients with successful LBBAP for bradycardia pacing indication and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction were selected. At follow-up, a 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) was recorded along with echocardiography for myocardial work analysis. V6-R wave peak time (RWPT), V1-RWTP, and QRS duration were compared. Results: One hundred forty-nine patients were studied. After 18.2 ± 7.3 months, V6-RWTP decreased from 74.4 ± 8.9 milliseconds to 71.5 ± 10.6 milliseconds (P < .001) in LBBP captures and from 90.9 ± 7.2 to 85.7 ± 9.3 milliseconds (P = .011) in left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) captures. V1-RWPT decreased from 120.5 ± 13.1 to 111.7 ± 11.8 milliseconds at follow-up (P < .001) in LBBP and from 118.6 ± 9.9 to 115.2 ± 12.1 milliseconds (P = .052) in LVSP. Paced QRS duration was also significantly reduced in LBBP (from 115.3 ± 13.6 to 107.6 ± 12.8 milliseconds at follow-up; P < .001). At follow-up, 29 patients lost the right bundle branch (RBB) delay pattern in lead V1, but QRS duration remained unchanged (111.3 ± 10.7 at implant vs 109.6 ± 12.5 milliseconds at follow-up; P = .413), as did V6-RWPT, in both LBBP (73.4 ± 5.9 at implant vs 73.1 ± 6.9 milliseconds at follow-up; P = .860) and LVSP captures (86.3 ± 5.6 at implant vs 85.3 ± 8.1 milliseconds at follow-up; P = .658). Mechanical synchrony in patients with and without RBB delay pattern was similar. Conclusions: In patients undergoing LBBAP for bradycardia pacing, electrical synchrony remained stable over time, suggesting that LBBAP is a reliable and durable method for physiologic pacing.
ISSN:2666-5018