Myocardial work parameters in left bundle branch area pacing versus other pacing techniques: a systematic review and aggregate comparative analysis

IF 2.5 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS IJC Heart and Vasculature Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-22 DOI:10.1016/j.ijcha.2025.101683
Raffaella Mistrulli , Sara Gharehdaghi , Arthur Iturriagagoitia , Elayne Kelen de Oliveira , Lucio Addeo , Stefano Valcher , Sara Corradetti , Michele Mattia Viscusi , Peter Peytchev , Ward A. Heggermont , Marc Vanderheyden , Emanuele Barbato , Guy Van Camp , Martin Penicka
{"title":"Myocardial work parameters in left bundle branch area pacing versus other pacing techniques: a systematic review and aggregate comparative analysis","authors":"Raffaella Mistrulli ,&nbsp;Sara Gharehdaghi ,&nbsp;Arthur Iturriagagoitia ,&nbsp;Elayne Kelen de Oliveira ,&nbsp;Lucio Addeo ,&nbsp;Stefano Valcher ,&nbsp;Sara Corradetti ,&nbsp;Michele Mattia Viscusi ,&nbsp;Peter Peytchev ,&nbsp;Ward A. Heggermont ,&nbsp;Marc Vanderheyden ,&nbsp;Emanuele Barbato ,&nbsp;Guy Van Camp ,&nbsp;Martin Penicka","doi":"10.1016/j.ijcha.2025.101683","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Cardiac conduction disease often necessitates permanent pacemaker implantation. While right ventricular pacing (RVP) effectively treats bradycardia, it may lead to adverse cardiac remodeling and heart failure. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has emerged as an alternative, potentially preserving myocardial function. Non-invasive myocardial work (MW) assessment provides valuable insights into left ventricular systolic function, energetics, and efficiency. This study systematically reviewed and analyzed MW parameters, comparing LBBAP to RVP and His bundle pacing (HBP). A meta-analysis of 241 patients across five studies examined four MW parameters—Global Work Index (GWI), Global Constructive Work (GCW), Global Wasted Work (GWW), and Global Work Efficiency (GWE)—at baseline, post-implantation, and last follow-up (median: 180 days, IQR: 7–360 days). At baseline, MW parameters were similar between LBBAP and RVP. Post-implantation, LBBAP preserved MW more effectively, showing significantly higher GWI than RVP (2250.0 ± 400.0 vs. 1600.0 ± 300.0 mmHg%, p = 0.027), a difference that remained significant at follow-up (p = 0.035). GWE was also significantly higher at follow-up (p = 0.011), while GCW and GWW showed no significant differences. MW parameters did not differ significantly between LBBAP and HBP (all p-values &gt;0.05). These findings suggest that LBBAP provides superior MW preservation compared to RVP, with significant benefits in GWI and GWE, while demonstrating comparable performance to HBP.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":38026,"journal":{"name":"IJC Heart and Vasculature","volume":"58 ","pages":"Article 101683"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IJC Heart and Vasculature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352906725000867","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cardiac conduction disease often necessitates permanent pacemaker implantation. While right ventricular pacing (RVP) effectively treats bradycardia, it may lead to adverse cardiac remodeling and heart failure. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has emerged as an alternative, potentially preserving myocardial function. Non-invasive myocardial work (MW) assessment provides valuable insights into left ventricular systolic function, energetics, and efficiency. This study systematically reviewed and analyzed MW parameters, comparing LBBAP to RVP and His bundle pacing (HBP). A meta-analysis of 241 patients across five studies examined four MW parameters—Global Work Index (GWI), Global Constructive Work (GCW), Global Wasted Work (GWW), and Global Work Efficiency (GWE)—at baseline, post-implantation, and last follow-up (median: 180 days, IQR: 7–360 days). At baseline, MW parameters were similar between LBBAP and RVP. Post-implantation, LBBAP preserved MW more effectively, showing significantly higher GWI than RVP (2250.0 ± 400.0 vs. 1600.0 ± 300.0 mmHg%, p = 0.027), a difference that remained significant at follow-up (p = 0.035). GWE was also significantly higher at follow-up (p = 0.011), while GCW and GWW showed no significant differences. MW parameters did not differ significantly between LBBAP and HBP (all p-values >0.05). These findings suggest that LBBAP provides superior MW preservation compared to RVP, with significant benefits in GWI and GWE, while demonstrating comparable performance to HBP.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
左束支区起搏与其他起搏技术的心肌工作参数:系统回顾和综合比较分析
心脏传导疾病常常需要植入永久性起搏器。虽然右心室起搏(RVP)有效治疗心动过缓,但它可能导致不良的心脏重塑和心力衰竭。左束分支区域起搏(LBBAP)已成为一种替代方法,可能保留心肌功能。无创心肌功(MW)评估为左心室收缩功能、能量学和效率提供了有价值的见解。本研究系统回顾和分析了MW参数,将LBBAP与RVP和His束起搏(HBP)进行了比较。在基线、植入后和最后一次随访(中位数:180天,IQR: 7-360天)时,对5项研究的241例患者进行了荟萃分析,检查了4个MW参数——总体工作指数(GWI)、总体建设性工作(GCW)、总体浪费工作(GWW)和总体工作效率(GWE)。基线时,LBBAP和RVP的MW参数相似。植入后,LBBAP更有效地保存了MW, GWI明显高于RVP(2250.0±400.0比1600.0±300.0 mmHg%, p = 0.027),随访时差异仍然显著(p = 0.035)。GWE在随访时也显著升高(p = 0.011),而GCW和GWW无显著差异。LBBAP与HBP的MW参数差异无统计学意义(p值均为0.05)。这些研究结果表明,与RVP相比,LBBAP提供了更好的MW保存,在GWI和GWE方面有显著的好处,同时表现出与HBP相当的性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
IJC Heart and Vasculature
IJC Heart and Vasculature Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
10.30%
发文量
216
审稿时长
56 days
期刊介绍: IJC Heart & Vasculature is an online-only, open-access journal dedicated to publishing original articles and reviews (also Editorials and Letters to the Editor) which report on structural and functional cardiovascular pathology, with an emphasis on imaging and disease pathophysiology. Articles must be authentic, educational, clinically relevant, and original in their content and scientific approach. IJC Heart & Vasculature requires the highest standards of scientific integrity in order to promote reliable, reproducible and verifiable research findings. All authors are advised to consult the Principles of Ethical Publishing in the International Journal of Cardiology before submitting a manuscript. Submission of a manuscript to this journal gives the publisher the right to publish that paper if it is accepted. Manuscripts may be edited to improve clarity and expression.
期刊最新文献
Differential effects of non-selective and cardio-selective beta-blocker therapy on ECG parameters in long QT syndrome type 1 Exercise-induced ventricular changes in recreational half-marathon runners compared with marathon/ultramarathon runners Heart failure etiology and lipoprotein subfractions: Insight from the SMARTEX-HF study Echocardiographic strain imaging and progression of atrial fibrillation in low-risk individuals Effects of atrial fibrillation on cerebral perfusion and cognitive function: A systematic review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1