Abstract:His bundle pacing (HBP) improves heart failure (HF) in atrial fibrillation (AF) pacing–dependent patients with a potential for a progressively increased threshold. HBP with right ventricular pacing (RVP) as a backup is always the preferred choice; however, RVP may induce HF. His Purkinje system pacing (HPSP) includes HBP and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP). LBBAP maintains left ventricular synchrony but has not been proven to be safe over the long term. We assessed the feasibility and safety of both HBP and LBBAP in AF pacing–dependent patients and compared the parameters of both leads at baseline and at the 6-month follow-up. A total of 16 AF patients in our center, who successfully attempted both HBP and LBBAP, were prospectively enrolled unless only one of these treatment statuses was attained. The electrocardiogram characteristics, leading parameters, echocardiography results, and clinical outcomes were assessed. Thirteen out of 16 patients achieved both HBP and LBBAP successfully in the same AF pacing–dependent patients. In symptomatic HF patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (n = 10), the left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) was reduced from 51.8 ± 4.4 to 48.3 ± 3.1 mm (p = 0.01) with the use of diuretics, either reduced or stopped (n = 7). During the follow-up, one patient in the group without HF had an increased HBP threshold and developed HF symptoms. His HF symptoms disappeared when switched into LBBAP mode. Another patient in the group with HF got his LVEF elevated by HBP for 3 months by utilizing left bundle branch block(LBBB)correction and continued to increase when switched into LBBAP for another 3 months due to an increased HBP correction threshold. The average unipolar pacing threshold of LBBAP was lower than that of HBP. No perforation or dislodgement occurred in our study. Both HBP and LBBAP could be attempted successfully in the same AF patients when one of the two modes could be adopted and switched according to the clinical feasibility. Compared with HBP, LBBAP yielded better and more stable parameters but showed comparable effects during the 6-month follow-up.

Left bundle branch area pacing versus endocardial resynchronization in patients with heart failure

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients With Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy Using Left Bundle Branch Pacing

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy by Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing in Patients with Heart Failure and Left Bundle Branch Block

Feasibility and Outcomes of Upgrading to Left Bundle Branch Pacing in Patients with Pacing-Induced Cardiomyopathy and Infranodal Atrioventricular Block.

Efficacy of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Biventricular Pacing in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Patients: Select Site - Cohort Study

Left bundle branch area pacing in heart failure: A systematic review and meta‐analysis with meta‐regression

Feasibility and Safety of Both His Bundle Pacing and Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: Intermediate Term Follow-Up

Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy on Morbidity and Mortality

Feasibility and Efficacy of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing in Patients Indicated for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.

Improved all-cause mortality with left bundle branch area pacing compared to biventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy: a meta-analysis

Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Meta-Analysis

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Heart Failure Patients by Using Left Bundle Branch Pacing

Conduction system pacing compared with biventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with heart failure and mildly reduced left ventricular ejection fraction: Results from International Collaborative LBBAP Study (I-CLAS) Group

Left bundle branch area pacing: A new era of cardiac resynchronization therapy?

Randomized Trial of Left Bundle Branch vs Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Complications of left bundle branch area pacing compared with biventricular pacing in candidates for resynchronization therapy: Results of a propensity score-matched analysis from a multicenter registry

Comparison of immediate changes of repolarization parameters after left bundle branch area pacing and traditional biventricular pacing in heart failure patients

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy for Patients with Mild to Moderately Reduced Ejection Fraction and Left Bundle Branch Block

Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing vs. Right Ventricular Pacing for Atrioventricular Block

Electrocardiographic predictors of clinical outcomes in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy patients with left bundle branch area pacing cardiac resynchronization therapy

Long-term efficacy of left bundle branch pacing and biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure complicated with left bundle branch block