His bundle pacing versus left bundle branch area pacing in patients undergoing atrioventricular node ablation: A prospective and comparative study.

Pacemaker implantation combined with atrioventricular node ablation (AVNA) is a well-established strategy for uncontrolled atrial arrhythmias. Limited data are available regarding His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) in this setting. To compare the outcomes of HBP and LBBAP in patients undergoing pacemaker implantation combined with AVN in routine clinical practice. We prospectively included all patients who underwent AVNA after successful conduction system pacing (CSP) in two hospitals between September 2017 and May 2023. The primary outcome was the 1-year composite of first episode of heart failure hospitalization, symptomatic atrioventricular node reconduction requiring a second AVNA procedure, lead revision or death from any cause. A total of 164 patients underwent AVNA following successful CSP (68 HBP and 96 LBBAP). Mean pacemaker implantation and AVNA procedure times were shorter in the LBBAP group than the HBP group (46±18 vs 59±23min; P<0.001 and 31±12 vs 43±22min, respectively; P<0.001). Complete atrioventricular block was more frequently obtained in the LBBAP group (88/96 patients [92%] vs 54/68 patients [79%]; P=0.04). One-year freedom from the composite outcome was more frequent in the LBBAP group (89.7% vs 72.9%; hazard ratio 0.32, 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.72; P=0.01). The strategy was similarly effective in both groups with a significant improvement in NYHA class and left ventricular ejection fraction. A secondary pacing threshold elevation >1V occurred only in the HBP group (11%). In this prospective, comparative study, LBBAP provided better 1-year outcomes than HBP.

Chaumont C ，Azincot M ，Savouré A ，Auquier N ，Hamoud RA ，Popescu E ，Viart G ，Mirolo A ，Eltchaninoff H ，Anselme F ... -  《-》

Single-center experience of efficacy and safety of atrioventricular node ablation after left bundle branch area pacing for the management of atrial fibrillation.

Atrioventricular node ablation (AVNA) with permanent pacing is an effective treatment of symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) prevents cardiac dyssynchrony associated with right ventricular pacing and could prevent worsening of heart failure (HF). In this retrospective monocentric study, all patients who received AVNA procedure with LBBAP were consecutively included. AVNA procedure data, electrical and echocardiographic parameters at 6 months, and clinical outcomes at 1 year were studied and compared to a matched cohort of patients who received AVNA procedure with conventional pacing between 2010 and 2023. Seventy-five AVNA procedures associated with LBBAP were studied. AVNA in this context was feasible, with a success rate of 98.7% at first ablation, and safe without any complications. There was no threshold rise at follow-up. At 1 year, 6 (8%) patients were hospitalized for HF and 2 (2.7%) were deceased. Patients had a significant improvement in NYHA class and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (P ≤ 0.0001). When compared to a matched cohort of patients with AVNA and conventional pacing, AVNA data and pacing complications rates were similar. Patients with LBBAP had a better improvement of LVEF (+5.27 ± 9.62% vs. -0.48 ± 14%, P = 0.01), and a lower 1-year rate of composite outcome of hospitalization for HF or death (HR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.16-0.95, P = 0.037), significant on survival analysis (log-rank P-value = 0.03). AVNA with LBBAP in patients with symptomatic AF is feasible, safe, and efficient. Hospitalization for HF or death rate was significantly lower and LVEF improvement was greater.

Jacobs M ，Bodin A ，Spiesser P ，Babuty D ，Clementy N ，Bisson A ... -  《-》

Comparison of left bundle branch area pacing between patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy and non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy.

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) seems to be an alternative to coronary sinus pacing in patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NI-DCM) with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and in pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM). The aim of the study was to compare the response of LBBAP in severe forms of both entities. Prospective study of patients with severe forms of PICM and NI-DCM in NYHA II-IV who underwent LBBAP. Clinical, electrocardiographic, echocardiographic and electrical parameters were analysed and the medium-term prognostic impact was assessed. Eighty patients were included, 25 with PICM and 55 with NI-DCM. PICM patients were older (PICM 75 [IQR 71-83.5] y.o vs NI-DCM 72 [IQR 60-78.5] y.o;p=0.01) and with longer baseline QRS duration (PICM 180 [IQR 167-194] ms vs NI-DCM 168 [IQR 153-178] ms;p<0.01), with no differences in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) or medical treatment. QRS reduction occurred in both groups, being greater in PICM (PICM CI 95% 54±20 ms, p<0.01; NI-DCM CI 95% 40±15 ms;p<0.01). A NT-ProBNP levels reduction and LVEF improvement were observed without differences between groups. At follow-up, there were no differences in admissions for HF (PICM 4.2% vs NI-DCM 11%;p=0.413), cardiac mortality (PICM 14.9% vs NI-DCM 2.9%;p=0.13) and all-cause mortality (PICM 21.7% vs NI-DCM 10.9%;p=0.08). LBBAP is an effective technique with a NT-ProBNP levels reduction and LVEF improvement in both groups without differences. At follow-up, both groups had a low rate of HF readmissions and there was a non-significant trend toward higher total mortality in PICM.

Perea-Armijo J ，Gutiérrez-Ballesteros G ，Mazuelos-Bellido F ，González-Manzanares R ，Huelva JM ，López-Aguilera J ，Pan M ，Segura Saint-Gerons JM ... -  《-》

His bundle pacing combined with atrioventricular node ablation for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Xu L ，Que D ，Yu W ，Yan J ，Zhang X ，Wang Y ，Yang Y ，Liang M ，Zhang R ，Song X ，Yang P ... -  《-》

Safety assessment of coronary arteries during left bundle branch area pacing.

This study aimed to assess the safety of left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) by measuring the distance from the tip of the electrode to the nearby coronary artery with a nine-partition grid method. From January 2019 to October 2020, patients who underwent LBBAP and postoperative coronary angiography in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University were included in the study. The patients' fluoroscopic images of LBBAP and coronary angiography were collected and analyzed. Changes in the ST‑T segment in the electrocardiogram (ECG), serum troponin, and myocardial enzyme profiles were observed before and after the LBBAP procedure. A total of 50 patients were included in this study, of whom 46 patients underwent implantation with a pacemaker and 4 patients received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). The pacing electrodes were confined to the posterior-middle (PM), median (M), Posterior inferior (PI), and middle inferior (MI) positions of the two-dimensional nine-square grid or in the junction area of the above positions, and were concentrated in the rectangle formed by the line of the center points of the four positions. The average vertical distances from the electrode tip to the left anterior descending branch artery (LAD), posterior descending branches (PD) and the left posterior ventricular branches (PL) were 19.69 ± 8.72 mm, 26.09 ± 8.02 mm, and 21.11 ± 7.86 mm, respectively; the minimum was 5.28 mm, 9.51 mm, and 8.69 mm, respectively. Coronary angiography in all patients showed no significant injury to the ventricular septal branch; however, we observed elevated serum troponin and changes in ST‑T segment in ECG. The study demonstrates that pacing electrodes in LBBAP can be safely implanted over a wide range. Coronary arteries are likely to be safe when the pacing electrodes are located within the rectangle formed by the line connecting the PM, M, PI, and MI zone centroids. The left bundle branch can be quickly captured and the safety of the coronary artery can be improved by locating the electrode in the posterior-mid zone. The potential risk of injury to the LAD from the electrode is greater compared with the PD.

Kong Q ，Chen H ，Hua J ，Xiong Z ，Le S ，Liu J ，Wang D ，Chen Q ... -  《-》