Back

Long-term outcomes of left bundle branch area pacing compared to right ventricular pacing in TAVI patients

Wang, X.; Xu, Y.-n.; Zeng, L.; Tan, K.; Zhang, X.; Han, X.; Xiong, T.-Y.; Zhao, Z.-G.; Peng, Y.; Wei, J.; Qiao, L.; He, S.; Chen, Y.; Zhou, M.; Li, X.; Wei, X.; Liang, Y.; Zhou, W.; Jiang, L.; Liu, X.; Meng, W.; Zhou, R.; Xiong, G.; Dai, M.; Deng, X. j.; Feng, Y.; Chen, M.

2024-06-13 cardiovascular medicine
10.1101/2024.06.12.24308735 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundNew-onset permanent pacemaker implantation (PPMI) is still a common complication after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with adverse clinical outcomes. This study aims to investigate whether left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) improves long-term clinical results compared to traditional right ventricular pacing (RVP) in patients requiring PPMI following TAVI. MethodsA total of 237 consecutive patients undergoing RVP (N=117) or LBBAP (N=120) following TAVI were retrospectively included. Long-term outcomes including all-cause death, heart failure rehospitalization (HFH) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) change compared to baseline were obtained until 5 years post-TAVI. ResultsThe mean age of the overall population was 74 years with a mean surgical risk score as 4.4%. The paced QRS duration was significantly shorter in LBBAP group compared to RVP group (151 {+/-} 18 vs. 122 {+/-}12 ms, P<0.001). There was no difference between two groups in all-cause death (13.7% vs. 13.3%, adjusted HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.37 to 1.58; P=0.466) or the composite endpoint of death and HFH (29.9% vs. 19.2%, adjusted HR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.70 to 2.13; P=0.476), however, the risk of HFH was significantly reduced in LBBAP group compared to RVP at 5 years after TAVI (21.4% vs. 7.5%, adjusted HR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.01 to 5.08; P=0.048). There was a more marked evolution of LVEF over time in LBBAP group (P=0.046 for LVEF changes over time between groups). ConclusionsLBBAP improved long-term clinical outcomes compared to RVP in patients undergoing PPMI after TAVI in terms of less HFH and better LVEF improvement.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.