Introduction: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces heart failure (HF) hospitalization and all-cause mortality inHF patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB). Biventricular pacing (BVP) is the gold standard for achieving CRT, but about 30%–40% of patients do not respond to BVP-CRT. Recent studies showed that left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) provided remarkable results in CRT. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis aiming to compare LBBP-CRT versus BVP-CRT in HF patients. Methods:We systematically searched the electronic databases for studies published from inception to December 29, 2022 and focusing on LBBP-CRT versus BVP-CRT in HF patients. The primary endpoint was HF hospitalization. The effect size was estimated using a random-effect model as Risk Ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD). Results: Ten studies enrolling 1063 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared to BVP-CRT, LBBP-CRT led to significant reduction in HF hospitalization [7.9% vs.14.5%; RR: 0.60 (95%CI: 0.39–0.93); p = .02], QRSd [MD: 30.26 ms (95%CI: 26.68–33.84); p < .00001] and pacing threshold [MD: −0.60 (95%CI: −0.71 to −0.48); p <.00001] at follow up. Furthermore, LBBP-CRT improved LVEF [MD: 5.78% (95%CI: 4.78–6.77); p < .00001], the rate of responder [88.5% vs.72.5%; RR: 1.19 (95%CI: 1.07–1.32); p = .002] and super-responder [60.8% vs. 36.5%; RR: 1.56 (95%CI: 1.27– 1.91); p < .0001] patients and the NYHA class [MD: −0.42 (95%CI: −0.71 to −0.14); p < .00001] compared to BVP-CRT. Conclusion: In HF patients, LBBP-CRT was superior to BVP-CRT in reducing HF hospitalization. Further significant benefits occurred within the LBBP-CRT group in terms of QRSd, LVEF, pacing thresholds, NYHA class and the rate of responder and super-responder patients.

Left bundle branch pacing versus biventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Giampaolo Vetta
Investigation
;
Manuela Ajello
Investigation
;
Lorenzo Pistelli
Investigation
;
Giuseppe Dattilo
Investigation
;
Scipione Carerj
Investigation
;
Pasquale Crea
Investigation
;
2023-01-01

Abstract

Introduction: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces heart failure (HF) hospitalization and all-cause mortality inHF patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB). Biventricular pacing (BVP) is the gold standard for achieving CRT, but about 30%–40% of patients do not respond to BVP-CRT. Recent studies showed that left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) provided remarkable results in CRT. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis aiming to compare LBBP-CRT versus BVP-CRT in HF patients. Methods:We systematically searched the electronic databases for studies published from inception to December 29, 2022 and focusing on LBBP-CRT versus BVP-CRT in HF patients. The primary endpoint was HF hospitalization. The effect size was estimated using a random-effect model as Risk Ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD). Results: Ten studies enrolling 1063 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared to BVP-CRT, LBBP-CRT led to significant reduction in HF hospitalization [7.9% vs.14.5%; RR: 0.60 (95%CI: 0.39–0.93); p = .02], QRSd [MD: 30.26 ms (95%CI: 26.68–33.84); p < .00001] and pacing threshold [MD: −0.60 (95%CI: −0.71 to −0.48); p <.00001] at follow up. Furthermore, LBBP-CRT improved LVEF [MD: 5.78% (95%CI: 4.78–6.77); p < .00001], the rate of responder [88.5% vs.72.5%; RR: 1.19 (95%CI: 1.07–1.32); p = .002] and super-responder [60.8% vs. 36.5%; RR: 1.56 (95%CI: 1.27– 1.91); p < .0001] patients and the NYHA class [MD: −0.42 (95%CI: −0.71 to −0.14); p < .00001] compared to BVP-CRT. Conclusion: In HF patients, LBBP-CRT was superior to BVP-CRT in reducing HF hospitalization. Further significant benefits occurred within the LBBP-CRT group in terms of QRSd, LVEF, pacing thresholds, NYHA class and the rate of responder and super-responder patients.
2023
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Left bundle branch pacing versus biventricular pacing for cardiac.pdf

solo gestori archivio

Descrizione: Article
Tipologia: Documento in Post-print (versione successiva alla peer review e accettata per la pubblicazione)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 1.1 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.1 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
3257397.pdf

solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 1.1 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.1 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11570/3257397
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 3
  • Scopus 12
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 8
social impact