Feasibility of Conduction System Pacing in Patients with Baseline Bundle Branch Block-A Single-Center Mid-Term Follow-Up Study

• Published in: Journal of clinical medicine Vol. 13; no. 2; p. 454
• Main Authors: Pestrea, Catalin, Rusu, Marcela, Enache, Roxana, Cicala, Ecaterina, Gavrilescu, Radu, Vaduva, Adrian, Ortan, Florin, Iorgulescu, Corneliu, Vatasescu, Radu
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 01.01.2024
• Subjects: Cardiac pacing; Cardiomyopathy; Care and treatment; Catheters; Ejection fraction; Health aspects; Heart block; Heart conduction system; Methods; Morphology; Patient outcomes; Patients; Statistical analysis; Success; Romania; Minneapolis Minnesota; United States > US; conduction system pacing; feasibility study; bundle branch block; mid-term follow-up
• ISSN: 2077-0383; 2077-0383
• DOI: 10.3390/jcm13020454

The primary prerequisite for a successful conduction system pacing (CSP) procedure is the integrity of the conduction system, which may be impaired if a baseline bundle branch block (BBB) is present. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and mid-term performance of permanent CSP in patients with baseline BBB and to compare the results between left bundle branch block (LBBB) and right bundle branch block (RBBB) patterns. A total of 101 patients with typical BBB and an attempt at CSP were retrospectively reviewed. Procedural characteristics, pacing, sensing parameters, and complications at baseline and after a mid-term follow-up were analyzed. The global procedural success for CSP was 93%. His bundle pacing (HBP) had a significantly lower success rate than left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) (50.5% vs. 86%). The paced QRS duration was significantly narrower with HBP. The pacing and sensing thresholds were significantly better with LBBAP. Procedural complications occurred only in the LBBAP group (two acute perforations in the LV cavity and one acute chest pain during lead fixation) without long-term sequelae. The HBP and the LBBAP procedural success rates were higher in the RBBB versus the LBBB group (62.5% vs. 44.9% and 100% vs. 81.5%, respectively). Baseline QRS duration, atrial volumes, and right ventricular diameters were significantly associated with HBP procedural failure. The follow-up pacing and sensing thresholds were similar to the baseline values for all pacing methods and BBB morphology. Only one device-related complication leading to pacing interruption was recorded. In patients with bundle branch blocks, CSP is a feasible procedure associated with a high success rate, stable pacing and sensing parameters, and low complication rates over a mid-term follow-up.