...
首页> 外文期刊>ESC Heart Failure >Left bundle branch area pacing delivery of cardiac resynchronization therapy and comparison with biventricular pacing
【24h】

Left bundle branch area pacing delivery of cardiac resynchronization therapy and comparison with biventricular pacing

机译:左捆绑分支区域起搏递送心脏再同步治疗和比较与五班位

获取原文
           

摘要

Aims This multicentre observational study aimed to prospectively assess the efficacy of left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) in heart failure patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and compare the 6‐month outcomes between LBBAP and biventricular pacing (BVP). Methods and results Consecutive patients with LBBB and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)?≤?35% were prospectively recruited if they had undergone LBBAP as a primary or rescue strategy from three separate centres from March to December 2018. Patients who received BVP in 2018 were retrospectively selected by using 2 to 1 propensity score matching to minimize bias. Implant characteristics and echocardiographic parameters were assessed during the 6‐month follow‐up. LBBAP procedure succeeded in 81.1% (30/37) of patients, with selective LBBAP in 10 patients, and 3 of 20 patients combined non‐selective LBBAP and LV lead pacing for further QRS narrowing. LBBAP resulted in significant QRS narrowing (from 178.2?±?18.8 to 121.8?±?10.8?ms, P??0.001, paced QRS duration?≤?130?ms in 27 patients) and improved LVEF (from 28.8?±?4.5% to 44.3?±?8.7%, P??0.001) during the 6‐month follow‐up. The comparison between 27 patients with LBBAP alone and 54 of 130 matching patients with BVP showed that LBBAP delivered a greater reduction in the QRSd (58.0 vs. 12.5?ms, P??0.001), a greater increase in LVEF (15.6% vs. 7.0%, P??0.001), and greater echocardiographic (88.9% vs. 66.7%, P?=?0.035) and super response (44.4% vs. 16.7%, P?=?0.007) to cardiac resynchronization therapy. Conclusions LBBAP could deliver cardiac resynchronization therapy in most patients with heart failure and LBBB, and might be a promising alternative resynchronization approach to BVP.
机译:目的,这种多期面观察研究旨在预期评估左束分支区域起搏(LBBAP)在心力衰竭患者左束分支块(LBBB)中的疗效,并比较LBBAP和BVENURAL PACING(BVP)之间的6个月结果。方法和结果连续患有LBBB和左心室喷射部分(LVEF)的患者(LVEF)?≤35%,如果他们在2018年3月至12月到2018年12月的三个单独的中心,他们被视为一个单独的中心或救援战略。2018年收到BVP的患者回顾性地选择2至1倾斜分数匹配以最小化偏差。在6个月的随访期间评估植入特征和超声心动图参数。 LBBAP程序成功占81.1%(30/37)的患者,10名患者的选择性LBBAP,20名患者中的3例组合非选择性LBBAP和LV铅起搏,用于进一步QRS缩小。 LBBAP导致显着的QRS缩小(从178.2?±18.8至121.8?±10.8?MS,P?<0.001,节奏QRS持续时间?≤α130?MS在27名患者中)和改善的LVEF(从28.8?在6个月的随访期间,4.5%至44.3?±8.7%,p?<0.001)。单独的27例LBBAP患者和130名匹配的BVP患者的比较显示,LBBAP在QRSD(58.0 vs.12.5?MS,P≤0.001)中递增更大的减少,LVEF越大(15.6%VS 。7.0%,p?<0.001),更大的超声心动图(88.9%与66.7%,p?= 0.035)和超级反应(44.4%与16.7%,p?= 0.007)到心脏重新同步治疗。结论LBBAP可以在大多数心力衰竭和LBBB患者中提供心脏重新同步治疗,并且可能是BVP的有希望的替代重新同步方法。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号