scholarly journals Associations between left bundle branch block with different PR intervals, QRS durations, heart rates and the risk of heart failure: a register-based cohort study using ECG data from the primary care setting

Open Heart ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e001425
Author(s):  
Marc Meller Søndergaard ◽  
Johannes Riis ◽  
Karoline Willum Bodker ◽  
Steen Møller Hansen ◽  
Jesper Nielsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Heart Rate ◽  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Pr Interval ◽  
Qrs Duration ◽  
The Impact

AimLeft bundle branch block (LBBB) is associated with an increased risk of heart failure (HF). We assessed the impact of common ECG parameters on this association using large-scale data.Methods and resultsUsing ECGs recorded in a large primary care population from 2001 to 2011, we identified HF-naive patients with a first-time LBBB ECG. We obtained information on sex, age, emigration, medication, diseases and death from Danish registries. We investigated the association between the PR interval, QRS duration, and heart rate and the risk of HF over a 2-year follow-up period using Cox regression analysis.Of 2471 included patients with LBBB, 464 (18.8%) developed HF during follow-up. A significant interaction was found between QRS duration and heart rate (p<0.01), and the analyses were stratified on these parameters. Using a QRS duration <150 ms and a heart rate <70 beats per minute (bpm) as the reference, all groups were statistically significantly associated with the development of HF. Patients with a QRS duration ≥150 ms and heart rate ≥70 bpm had the highest risk of developing HF (HR 3.17 (95% CI 2.41 to 4.18, p<0.001). There was no association between the PR interval and HF after adjustment.ConclusionProlonged QRS duration and higher heart rate were associated with increased risk of HF among primary care patients with LBBB, while no association was observed with PR interval. Patients with LBBB with both a prolonged QRS duration (≥150 ms) and higher heart rate (≥70 bpm) have the highest risk of developing HF.

P2630Incidence and prognostic impact of new-onset left bundle branch block in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
S L Kristensen ◽  
R Roerth ◽  
P S Jhund ◽  
S Beggs ◽  
L Kober ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Reduced Ejection Fraction ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Qrs Duration ◽  
New Onset

Abstract Background Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves survival in patients with heart failure, reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and left bundle branch block (LBBB). However, little is known about the incidence of LBBB in HFrEF and the risk factors for developing this. We addressed these questions in the PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE trials. Methods We identified 7703 patients with a non-paced rhythm on their baseline ECG, a QRS<130 ms, and at least one follow-up ECG (done at annual visits and end of study). Patients were stratified by baseline QRS duration (≤100 ms - reference; 101–115 ms and 116–129 ms) and followed until development of QRS duration ≥130 ms with a LBBB configuration or latest available ECG. The crude LBBB incidence rate per 100 person-years (py) was identified in the three QRS duration subgroups. Additionally, we examined risk of the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization, and all-cause mortality, in patients with incident LBBB vs. no incident LBBB. Results Overall, 313 of 7703 patients (4%) developed LBBB during a mean follow-up of 2.7 years, yielding an incidence rate of 1.5 per 100 py. The rate ranged from 0.9 in those with QRS ≤100 ms to 4.0 per 100 py in patients with QRS 116–129 ms. Other predictors of incident LBBB included male sex, age, lower LVEF, HF duration and absence of AF. The risk of the primary composite endpoint was higher among those who developed incident LBBB vs no incident LBBB; event rates 13.5 vs 10.0 per 100 py, yielding an adjusted HR of 1.43 (1.05–1.96). For all-cause mortality the corresponding rates were 12.6 vs 7.3 per 100 py; HR 1.55 (1.16–2.07) (Table 1). Table 1. Risk of outcomes according to incident LBBB during follow-up No. events Crude rate per 100py Adjusted* HR (95% CI) HF hospitalization or CV death   No incident LBBB 2145 10.0 (9.6–10.4) 1.00 (ref.)   Incident LBBB 43 13.5 (10.0–18.2) 1.43 (1.05–1.96) All-cause mortality   No incident LBBB 1662 7.3 (6.9–7.6) 1.00 (ref.)   Incident LBBB 48 12.6 (9.5–16.7) 1.55 (1.16–2.07) Conclusion Among patients with HFrEF, the annual incidence of new-onset LBBB (and a potential indication for CRT), was around 1.5%, ranging from 1% in those with QRS duration below 100 ms to 4% in those with QRS 116–129 ms. Incident LBBB was associated with a much higher risk of adverse outcomes, highlighting the importance of repeat ECG monitoring in patients with HFrEF. Acknowledgement/Funding Novartis

Abstract MP25: Obesity, Heart Failure Risk & Cardiorespiratory Fitness

Circulation ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 137 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter F Kokkinos ◽  
Puneet Narayan ◽  
Charles Faselis ◽  
Jonathan Myers ◽  
Carl Lavie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Exercise Capacity ◽  
Cardiorespiratory Fitness ◽  
Reference Group ◽  
Normal Weight ◽  
Entire Cohort ◽  
Metabolic Equivalents ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
The Impact

Introduction: Obesity, defined as body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m 2 , is associated with increased incidence of heart failure (HF). Increased cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), as indicated by increased exercise capacity, is associated with lower risk of cardiovascular disease and HF. However, the CRF-BMI-HF interaction has not been fully explored. Hypothesis: We assessed the hypothesis that the risk of HF associated with increased BMI is moderated by increased CRF. Methods: We identified 19,881 Veterans (mean age: 58.0±11.3 years) who completed an exercise tolerance test (ETT) to assess either CRF status or suspected ischemia at two VA Medical Centers (Washington DC and Palo Alto, CA). None had documented HF at baseline or evidence of ischemia during the ETT. We established four BMI categories: <25 kg/m 2 ; 25-29.9 kg/m 2 ; 30-34.9 kg/m 2 ; and ≥35 kg/m 2 . In addition, we established four CRF categories based on age-stratified quartiles of peak metabolic equivalents (METs) achieved (mean ± SD): Least-Fit (4.5±1.2 METs; n=4,743); Low-Fit (6.6±1.3; n=5,103); Moderate-Fit (8.0±1.3 METs; n=5,084); and High-Fit (11.1±2.4 METs; n=4,951). Multivariable Cox models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals [CI] for incidence of HF across BMI categories for the entire cohort, using BMI 25-29.9 kg/m 2 (lowest HF rate) as the reference group. We then stratified the cohort by the four BMI categories and assessed HF risk across CRF categories within each stratum, using the Least-fit category as the reference group. The models were adjusted for age, race, gender, cardiac risk factors, sleep apnea, alcohol dependence, medications. Results: During follow-up (median=11.8 years), 2,193 developed HF (10.5 per 1,000 person-years of follow-up). The HF risk for normal weight individuals (18.5-24.9 kg/m2) was 10% higher (p=0.93). For obese individuals, the HF risk was 22% higher in those with BMI 30-34.9 kg/m 2 (HR=1.22; 95% CI: 1.09-1.35) and 50% higher (HR=1.50, 95% CI: 1.32-1.72) for those with BMI ≥35 kg/m 2 . When CRF (peak METs achieved) was introduced in the model, the risk for those with BMI 30-34.9 was reduced from 22% to 16% (HR=1.16; 95% CI: 1.04-1.29) and from 50% to 29% (HR=1.29; 95% CI: 1.13-1.48) among those with ≥35 kg/m 2 . For every 1-MET increase in exercise capacity, HF risk was 15% lower (HR=0.85; 95% CI: 0.83-0.87). We then assessed the impact of CRF on the risk of HF within each of the four BMI categories. The HF risk declined progressively (range: 25% to 69%; p<0.01) with increasing fitness within all BMI categories. Conclusions: The obesity-associated increased risk of HF was attenuated by increased CRF. The HF risk was progressively decreased with increased CRF within all BMI categories.

Non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with left bundle branch block after TAVR

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chloé Auberson ◽  
Patrick Badertscher ◽  
Antonio Madaffari ◽  
Meriton Malushi ◽  
Luc Bourquin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Conduction Delay ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Surface Ecg ◽  
Pr Interval ◽  
Electrocardiographic Parameters

Abstract Aims Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is the most common conduction disorder after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with an increased risk of atrioventricular (AV) block. The aim of the current study was to identify non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with LBBB. Methods We analyzed consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with pre-existing or new-onset LBBB between August 2014 and August 2020. His ventricular (HV) interval measurement was performed on day 1 after TAVR. Baseline, procedural, as well as surface and intracardiac electrocardiographic parameters were included. Infranodal conduction delay was defined as HV interval > 55 ms. Results Of 825 patients screened after TAVR, 151 patients (82 ± 6 years, 39% male) with LBBB were included. Among these, infranodal conduction delay was observed in 25%. ΔPR (difference in PR interval after and before TAVR), PR and QRS duration after TAVR were significantly longer in the group with HV prolongation. In a multivariate analysis in patients with sinus rhythm (n = 123), ΔPR (OR per 10 ms increase: 1.52; 95%CI: 1.19–2.01; p = 0.002) was the only independent factor associated with infranodal conduction delay. A change in PR interval by 20 ms yielded a specificity of 83% and a sensitivity of 46%, with a negative predictive value of 84% and a positive predictive value of 45% to predict HV prolongation. Conclusions Simple analysis of surface ECG and a calculated ΔPR < 20 ms can be used as predictor for the absence of infranodal conduction delay in post-TAVR patients with LBBB. Graphical abstract

scholarly journals Long term perspective with LBBB: role of stress echocardiography

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Dedic ◽  
N Boskovic ◽  
V Giga ◽  
M Tesic ◽  
S Aleksandric ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Stress Echocardiography ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Survival Curve ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Cox Regression Analysis ◽  
Increased Risk

Abstract Background Previous studies have shown that left bundle branch block (LBBB), as a relatively common electrocardiographic (ECG) abnormality, represents the condition with often non benign and sometimes adverse outcome. Purpose The Aim of our study was to determine the predictive value of a stress echocardiography test in patients with LBBB. Methods Our study population included 189 patients (88 male, 46.6%, mean age 63.08±9.65) with diagnosed left bundle branch block who performed stress echocardiography (SECHO) according to Bruce protocol. Median follow-up of the patients was 56 months (IQR 48–71 months) for the occurrence of cardiovascular death and non-fatal myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization (coronary artery bypass grafting-CABG or percutaneous coronary intervention-PCI). Results Out of 189 patients, 32 (16.9%) patients had positive, while 157 (83.1%) patients had negative SECHO test. During the follow up period 28 patients had major adverse cardiac event: 1 nonfatal myocardial infarction, 6 heart failure hospitalizations, 5 CABGs, 8 PCIs, while 8 patients had cardiac death. Using the Cox regression analysis, univariate predictors of adverse cardiac events were diabetes mellitus (HR 4.530 [95% CI 1.355–15.141], p=0.014), PCI (HR 4.288 [95% [95% CI 2.010–9.144], p&lt;0.001) and positive SECHO test (HR 2.289 [95% CI 1.006–5207], p=0.048). In the multivariate analysis only previous PCI remained independent predictor of adverse events (HR 3.650 [95% CI 1.665–8.003], p=0.001). p=0.048). Using the Kaplan-Meier survival curve the patients with negative SECHO had better outcome compared to patients with positive SECHO (140/160; 87,5% vs 21/29; 72.4%, p=0.035) and much longer event-free time (77.4±1.6 months vs 67.1±5.4 months, Log Rank 4.136, p=0.042) Conclusion Patients with LBBB and negative SEHO test have good prognosis. Patients with history of CAD and diabetes mellitus and LBBB are at increased risk for future events and need periodical reassessment. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Impact of left bundle branch block on heart rate and its relationship to treatment with ivabradine in chronic heart failure

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (9) ◽  
pp. 1044-1052 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan-Christian Reil ◽  
Michele Robertson ◽  
Ian Ford ◽  
Jeffrey Borer ◽  
Michel Komajda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Heart Rate ◽  
Chronic Heart Failure ◽  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Bundle Branch Block

scholarly journals Peripheral arterial disease diagnosis and management in primary care: a qualitative study

BJGP Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. bjgpopen19X101659 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Lecouturier ◽  
Jason Scott ◽  
Nikki Rousseau ◽  
Gerard Stansby ◽  
Andrew Sims ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Peripheral Arterial Disease ◽  
Arterial Disease ◽  
Disease Diagnosis ◽  
Diagnosis And Management ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Peripheral Arterial ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundPatients diagnosed with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) are at an increased risk of coronary heart disease, stroke, heart attack, and PAD progression. If diagnosed early, cardiovascular risk factors can be treated and the risk of other cardiovascular diseases can be reduced. There are clear guidelines on PAD diagnosis and management, but little is known about the issues faced in primary care with regards adherence to these, and about the impact of these issues on patients.AimTo identify the issues for primary care health professionals (HPs) and patients in PAD diagnosis and management, and to explore the impact of these on HPs and PAD patients.Design & settingQualitative study conducted in a primary care setting in the North East of England. Data was collected between December 2014 and July 2017.MethodSemi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted with PAD register patients (n = 17), practice nurses ([PNs], n = 17), district nurses (DNs], n = 20), tissue viability nurses (n = 21), and GPs (n = 21).ResultsHPs’ attitudes to PAD, difficulty accessing tests, and patient delays impacted upon diagnosis. Some HPs had a reactive approach to PAD identification. Patients lacked understanding about PAD and some reported a delay consulting their GP after the onset of PAD symptoms. After diagnosis, few were attending for regular GP follow-up.ConclusionPatient education about PAD symptoms and risks, and questioning about exercise tolerance, could address the problem of under-reporting. Annual reviews could provide an opportunity to probe for PAD symptoms and highlight those requiring further investigation. Improved information when PAD is diagnosed and, considering the propensity for patients to tolerate worsening symptoms, the introduction of annual follow-up (at minimum) is warranted.

scholarly journals Impact of new-onset left bundle branch block on clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after TAVR with SAPIEN-3 valve

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
H Lak ◽  
Y Sammour ◽  
J Chahine ◽  
S Chawla ◽  
A Kadri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Volume Index ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Common Finding ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Sapien 3 ◽  
The Impact ◽  
New Onset

Abstract Background New left bundle branch block (LBBB) is a common finding after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) that can result in worse outcomes after TAVR. We aim to investigate the impact of new-onset LBBB after TAVR using the SAPIEN-3 (S3) valve. Methods Consecutive patients who underwent transfemoral-TAVR with S3 valve between April 2015 and December 2018 were included. Exclusion criteria included pre-existing LBBB, right bundle branch block, left anterior hemiblock, left posterior hemiblock, wide QRS ≥120 msec, prior permanent pacemaker (PPM), and non-transfemoral access. Results Among 612 patients, 11.4% developed new-onset LBBB upon discharge. Implantation depth was the only predictor of new-onset LBBB (OR 1.294; 95% CI 1.121–1.493; p&lt;0.001). The median (IQR) length of stay was longer with new-onset LBBB [3 (2–5) days vs. 2 (1–3) days; p&lt;0.001]. New-onset LBBB was associated with higher thirty-day PPM requirement (18.6% vs. 5.4%; p&lt;0.001) including those implanted after discharge (4.3% vs. 0.9%; p=0.02). There was no difference in 3-year all-cause mortality between both groups (30.9% vs. 30.6%; log-rank p=0.829). Further, new-onset LBBB was associated with lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at both 30 days (55.9±11.4% vs. 59.3±9%; p=0.026) and 1 year (55±12% vs. 60.1±8.9%; p=0.002) despite no differences at baseline. These changes were still present when we stratified patients according to baseline LVEF (≥50% or &lt;50%). We also noted higher mean LV end-diastolic volume index (51.4±18.6 vs. 46.4±15.1 ml/m2; p=0.036), and LV end-systolic volume index (23.2±14.1 vs. 18.9±9.7 ml/m2; p=0.009) with new-onset LBBB at 1 year. Lastly, there were significantly higher rates of heart failure readmissions at 1 year with new-onset LBBB (10.7% vs. 4.4%; log-rank p=0.033). Conclusion Among our cohort of S3 recipients, new-onset LBBB was associated with higher PPM requirement, worse LVEF, higher LV volumes and increased risk of heart failure hospitalizations. However, it did not affect mortality in the short-to-intermediate post-TAVR period. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Figure 1. All-cause Survival

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document