Effect of scar and His–Purkinje and myocardium conduction on response to conduction system pacing

摘要

Abstract Introduction Conduction system pacing (CSP), in the form of His bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch pacing (LBBP), is emerging as a valuable cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) delivery method. However, patient selection and therapy personalization for CSP delivery remain poorly characterized. We aim to compare pacing‐induced electrical synchrony during CRT, HBP, LBBP, HBP with left ventricular (LV) epicardial lead (His‐optimized?CRT [HOT‐CRT]), and LBBP with LV epicardial lead (LBBP‐optimized CRT [LOT‐CRT]) in patients with different conduction disease presentations using computational modeling. Methods We simulated ventricular activation on 24?four‐chamber heart geometries, including His–Purkinje systems with proximal left bundle branch block (LBBB). We simulated septal scar, LV lateral wall scar, and mild and severe myocardium and LV His–Purkinje system conduction disease by decreasing the conduction velocity (CV) down to 70% and 35% of the healthy CV. Electrical synchrony was measured by the shortest interval to activate 90% of the ventricles (90% of biventricular activation time [BIVAT‐90]). Results Severe LV His–Purkinje conduction disease favored CRT (BIVAT‐90: HBP 101.5?±?7.8?ms vs.?CRT 93.0?±?8.9?ms, p?