14-08-2023 | CSF Drainage
Difference of ventricular synchrony between LBBP, LBFP and LVSP: A speckle tracking echocardiographic study
Authors:
Chaodi Cheng, Lanlan Sun, Xinyi Peng, Yanjiang Wang, Liang Shi, Tong Zhao, Ziyu Wei, Ying Tian, Xingpeng Liu
Published in:
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology
|
Issue 3/2024
Login to get access
Abstract
Purpose
Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has emerged as a physiological and stable form of pacing. We aim to compare the mechanical ventricular synchrony of LBBP, LBFP, and LVSP.
Methods
Proximal Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP), left bundle fascicular pacing (LBFP) and left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) were identified in patients with bradycardia who successfully underwent LBBAP. Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% or QRS duration (QRSd) ≥ 120 ms were excluded. By using electrocardiograms, the left ventricular activation time (LVAT) and QRS duration (QRSd) were measured to examine electrophysiological synchrony. As indications of mechanical synchrony, global longitudinal strain (GLS), global circumferential strain (GCS), global radial strain (GRS), and peak strain dispersion (PSD) were evaluated by using 2-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography (2D-STE).
Results
In 56 patients, data were collected during LBBP (n = 18), LBFP (n = 16), and LVSP (n = 22). LVSP resulted in a longer LVAT (91.3 ± 14.9 ms) than LBBP (77.1 ± 10.8 ms, P < 0.05) and LBFP (72.1 ± 9.6 ms, P < 0.05), but all three groups had similar QRSd. There were no differences in GLS, GCS, GRS, or PSD between LBBP, LBFP, and LVSP.
Conclusions
In patients with normal cardiac function and narrow QRS, though LBBAP with LBB capture resulted in better electrophysiological synchrony than without, the mechanical synchrony of the three groups was comparable.