scholarly journals Comparison of synchronization between left bundle branch and his bundle pacing in atrial fibrillation patients: An intra‐patient‐controlled study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xia Sheng ◽  
Yi‐Wen Pan ◽  
Chan Yu ◽  
Bei Wang ◽  
Pei Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
His Bundle ◽  
His Bundle Pacing

His-bundle pacing in CHF-patients with narrow QRS and chronic AF – an upgrade from single-chamber to dual-chamber ICD

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Ciesielski ◽  
A Slawuta ◽  
A Zabek ◽  
K Boczar ◽  
B Malecka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Clinical Status ◽  
Chronic Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Dual Chamber ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Single Chamber ◽  
His Bundle ◽  
His Bundle Pacing ◽  
Short Period

Abstract   A single-chamber ICD is a standard method for primary SCD prophylaxis. In patients with chronic atrial fibrillation it does not contribute to the regularization of heart rate, which is crucial for proper treatment. Moreover, to avoid the deleterious effect of right ventricular pacing only minority of the patients with single chamber ICD get the appropriate, recommended dose of beta-blockers. The aim of our study was to assess the efficacy of direct His-bundle pacing in a population of patients with congestive heart failure and chronic atrial fibrillation using upgrade from single chamber to dual-chamber ICD and atrial channel to perform the His-bundle pacing Methods The study population included 39 patients (37 men, 2 women) aged 67.2±9.3 years, with CHF and chronic AF implanted primarily with single chamber ICD with established pharmacotherapy and stable clinical status. Results The echocardiography measurements at baseline and during follow-up were presented in the table: During short period (3–6 months) of follow-up the mean values of EF and LV dimensions significantly improved. This was also accompanied by functional status improvement. Conclusions His-bundle-based pacing in CHF-chronic AF patients contributes to significant echocardiographic and clinical improvement. Standard single-chamber ICD implantation in CHF-chronic AF patients yields only SCD prevention without influence on remodeling process. The physiological pacing contributes to better pharmacotherapy. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

P1239His-bundle pacing in CHF-patients with narrow QRS and chronic AF using dual-chamber ICD

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Slawuta ◽  
K Boczar ◽  
A Zabek ◽  
A Ciesielski ◽  
J Hiczkiewicz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Congestive Heart Failure ◽  
Dual Chamber ◽  
His Bundle ◽  
His Bundle Pacing ◽  
Narrow Qrs ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Abstract The heart rate regularization is crucial for proper treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure. The standard resynchronization can be applied, but in patients with narrow QRS this procedure is of no use. The aim of our study is to assess the efficacy of direct His-bundle pacing in patients with congestive heart failure and chronic atrial fibrillation using dual chamber ICD implanted for prevention of sudden cardiac death. Methods The study population included 78 patients with CHF and chronic AF: group A - 56 pts treated with direct His-bundle pacing using atrial port of dual chamber ICD and group B - 22 patients implanted with single chamber ICD as recommended by the guidelines. The patients in group B constituting clinical controls were derived from the Heart Failure Outpatients Clinic with established clinical status and pharmacotherapy. Results The demographic data, clinical characteristics and echocardiography measurements at baseline and during follow-up were presented in the table: Table 1 Group A Group B P value Age (years) 69.7±6.9 66.7±11.3 n.s. Sex (% of male sex) 84.0 86.4 n.s. Ventricular pacing (%) – 46.3±31.2 – His-bundle pacing (%) 81.7±9.2 – – pre post pre post pre vs. post LVEDD (mm) 66.9±4.9 59.9±4.7 64.8±8.0 64.7±8.1 <0.01 n.s. EF (%) 29.6±3.8 43.6±5.9 28.1±6.1 28.8±7.3 <0.01 n.s. NYHA class 2.7±0.6 1.4±0.6 2.5±0.6 2.0±0.2 <0.05 n.s. B-blocker dose (metoprolol equivalent dose) 104.6±41.6 214.3±82.6 78.3±56.6 103.1±49.2 <0.001 <0.05 During 12-months of follow-up the mean values of NYHA functional class, EF and LV dimensions did not change in group B but significantly improved in group A. The physiological His-bundle based pacing enabled optimal beta-blocker dosing. The studied groups had no tachyarrhythmia at baseline so the presumable atrial fibrillation-related harm depends on the rhythm irregularity. Conclusions His-bundle-based pacing in CHF-chronic AF patients contributes to significant echocardiographic and clinical improvement. Standard single-chamber ICD implantation in CHF-chronic AF patients yields only SCD prevention without influence on remodeling process. The CHF-patients with narrow QRS and chronic AF benefit from substantially higher beta-blockade which can be instituted in His-bundle pacing group.

Abstract 17261: Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm After His Bundle Pacing and AV Nodal Ablation in Patients With Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation After Catheter Ablation

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amrish Deshmukh ◽  
Puspha Khanal ◽  
Amlish Gondal ◽  
Mary Romanyshyn ◽  
Pramod Deshmukh
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Sinus Rhythm ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization ◽  
Atrial Remodeling ◽  
Clinical Recurrence ◽  
His Bundle ◽  
His Bundle Pacing ◽  
Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation

Background: Catheter ablation (CA) is the most effective means of rhythm control for atrial fibrillation (AF) but is not curative. Irregular and rapid ventricular activation by AF begets AF. Cardiac resynchronization and atrioventricular nodal (AVN) ablation have been associated with favorable atrial remodeling and spontaneous reversion to sinus rhythm in patients with longstanding atrial fibrillation. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that in patients with longstanding persistent AF who had failed CA, AVN ablation and His bundle pacing (HBP) may improve maintenance of sinus rhythm. Methods and Results: A total of 13 patients (5 female, age 69±8.7 years, 8 with HFrEF, BMI 29 ±5 kg/m 2 ,LVEF 38±15%, NYHA 3±0.6) underwent simultaneous AVN ablation and HBP an average of 531 days (Range 1-2158 days) after CA for AF with recurrent AF. Prior to AVN ablation and HBP these patients had a median 9-year history of AF (IQR: 5-15 years) with a median of 2 prior cardioversions (IQR: 1-4) and 2 prior CA. All patients had failed at least 1 antiarrhythmic drug. In 3 patients HBP induced cardiac resynchronization of pre-existing bundle branch block and in 8 patients HBP was fused with ventricular pacing to optimize QRS duration. 12 of 13 patients had an atrial lead. All patients underwent cardioversion at the time of the procedure. In a median of follow up of 21 months (IQR:4-74 months), 7 of the 13 patients (54%) had no device detected or clinical recurrence of AF. In follow up LVEF increased to 46±12.7% and NYHA class to 2 ±0.2. Of patients with recurrence, 3 underwent CA and had no recurrence of AF in subsequent follow up. Conclusion: In patients with advanced longstanding persistent AF, a strategy of AVN ablation and HBP allowed for ventricular rate control with a narrow QRS. This approach resulted in a lower than expected rate of AF recurrence.

scholarly journals Development of New‐Onset or Progressive Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Permanent HIS Bundle Pacing Versus Right Ventricular Pacing: Results From the RUSH HBP Registry

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (22) ◽  
Author(s):  
Venkatesh Ravi ◽  
Dominik Beer ◽  
Grzegorz M. Pietrasik ◽  
Jillian L. Hanifin ◽  
Sara Ooms ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Right Ventricular ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Prior History ◽  
Ventricular Pacing ◽  
Right Ventricular Pacing ◽  
His Bundle ◽  
His Bundle Pacing ◽  
History Of ◽  
New Onset

Background Conventional right ventricular pacing (RVP) has been associated with an increased incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF). We sought to compare the occurrence of new‐onset AF and assessed AF disease progression during long‐term follow‐up between His bundle pacing (HBP) and RVP. Methods and Results We included patients undergoing initial dual‐chamber pacemaker implants at Rush University Medical Center between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2019. A total of 360 patients were evaluated, and 225 patients (HBP, n=105; RVP, n=120) were included in the study. Among the 148 patients (HBP, n=72; RVP, n=76) with no history of AF, HBP demonstrated a lower risk of new‐onset AF (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.28–0.99; P =0.046) compared with traditional RVP. This benefit was observed with His or RVP burden exceeding 20% (HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13–0.64; P =0.002), ≥40% (HR, 0.31; P =0.007), ≥60% (HR, 0.35; P =0.015), and ≥80% (HR, 0.40; P =0.038). There was no difference with His or RV pacing burden <20% (HR, 0.613; 95% CI, 0.213–1.864; P =0.404). In patients with a prior history of AF, there was no difference in AF progression ( P =0.715); however, in a subgroup of patients with a pacing burden ≥40%, HBP demonstrated a trend toward a lower risk of AF progression (HR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.03–1.16; P =0.072). Conclusions HBP demonstrated a lower risk of new‐onset AF compared with RVP, which was primarily observed at a higher pacing burden.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document