Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization: Propensity Score Analysis

左束支区域起搏与双心室起搏在心脏再同步治疗中的应用:倾向评分分析

阅读:11

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has emerged as a promising alternative to conventional biventricular pacing (BIVP) for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). While previous data suggest LBBAP may provide superior outcomes, existing evidence needs more data. METHODS: This retrospective study included all patients who underwent de-novo CRT at two centers in France (2022-2024). Procedural and clinical outcomes were compared between LBBAP and BIVP groups for de-novo CRT indications, using inverse probability weighting propensity score. RESULTS: A total of 314 patients were included (75 LBBAP, 239 BIVP). Patients receiving LBBAP were older and more likely to have atrial fibrillation. Compared to BIVP, LBBAP was associated with shorter procedure time (96 vs. 128 min; p < 0.001), narrower paced QRS (128 vs. 139 ms; p < 0.001), and lower post-discharge device-related complications (1% vs. 11%; HR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01-0.84; p = 0.033). At 1-year, improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was similar between groups (median ΔLVEF +15%; p = 0.438), as were hyper-response rates (52% vs. 60%; p = 0.231). After IPW-PS, no significant differences were observed in heart failure hospitalization (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.40-2.64; p = 0.999), new-onset atrial fibrillation (HR 1.69, 95% CI 0.41-6.94; p = 0.492), sustained ventricular arrhythmias (HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.15-6.49; p = 0.828), overall (HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.44-2.62; p = 0.801), and cardiovascular deaths (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.27-2.79; p = 0.927). CONCLUSION: LBBAP is associated with comparable resynchronization and clinical outcomes to BIVP, with fewer late complications.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。