Abstract:<h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Background</h3>Right ventricular apex (RVA) is still the most common implanted site in the world. There are a large number of RVA pacing population who have been carrying dual-chamber permanent pacemaker (PPM) over decades. Comparison of left ventricular dyssynchrony, morphology and systolic function between RVA pacing population and healthy population is unknown.<h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Method</h3>This case-control study enrolled 61 patients suffered from complete atrioventricular block (III°AVB) for replacement of dual-chamber PPM. Then, 61 healthy controls matched with PPM patients in gender, age, follow-up duration and complications were included. The lead impedance, pacing threshold and sensing were compared between at implantation and long-term follow-up. Left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony, morphology and systolic function were compared between RVA pacing population (RVA group) and healthy population (healthy group) at implantation (baseline) and follow-up. And clarify the predictors of LV systolic function in RVA group at follow-up.<h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Results</h3>After 112.44 ± 34.94 months of follow-up, comparing with parameters at implantation, atrial lead impedance decreased significantly (690 ± 2397 Ω vs 613 ± 2257 Ω, p = 0.048); atrial pacing threshold has a increased trend and P-wave amplitude has a decreased trend, but there was no statistical differences; while, RVA ventricular lead threshold increased significantly (0.50 ± 0.23 V vs 0.91 ± 0.47 V, p < 0.001), impedance (902 ± 397 Ω vs 680 ± 257 Ω,p < 0.001) and R-wave amplitude (11.71 ± 9.40mv vs 7.00 ± 6.91 mv, p < 0.001) decreased significantly. Compared with healthy group, long-term RVA pacing significantly increased ventricular dyssynchrony (mean QRS duration, 156.21 ± 29.80 ms vs 97.08 ± 15.70 ms, p < 0.001), left atrium diameter (LAD, 40.61 ± 6.15 mm vs 37.49 ± 4.80 mm,p = 0.002), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD, 49.15 ± 5.93 mm vs 46.41 ± 3.80 mm,p = 0.003), left ventricular hypertrophy (LVMI, 121.86 ± 41.52 g/m2 vs 98.41 ± 25.29 g/m2,p < 0.001), significantly deteriorated degree of tricuspid regurgitation (p < 0.001), and significantly decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, 61.38 ± 8.10% vs 64.64 ± 5.85%, p = 0.012), but after long-term RVA pacing, the mean LVEF was still more than 50%. Long-term RVA group LVEF was negatively correlated with preimplantation LVMI (B = -0.055,t = −2.244,p = 0.029), LVMI at follow-up (B = −0.081,t = −3.864,p = 0.000) and tricuspid regurgitation at follow-up (B = −3.797,t = −3.599,p = 0.001).<h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Conclusion</h3>In conclusion, although long-term RVA pacing has significantly effects on left ventricular dyssynchrony, morphology and systolic function in III°AVB patients, the mean LVEF is still >50%. High preimplantation LVMI can predict the decline of LVEF.

Clinical outcomes in patients with atrioventricular block undergoing pacemaker: 3-year follow-up

New-onset Heart Failure after Permanent Right Ventricular Apical Pacing in Patients with Acquired High-Grade Atrioventricular Block and Normal Left Ventricular Function.

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

Reduction of Unnecessary Right Ventricular Pacing by Managed Ventricular Pacing and Search AV+ Algorithms in Pacemaker Patients: 12-Month Follow-Up Results of a Randomized Study.

Mid-term clinical outcomes of left bundle branch area pacing compared to accurate right ventricular septal pacing

Effects of long-term right ventricular apex pacing on left ventricular dyssynchrony, morphology and systolic function

Initial Experience with Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing in Patients with Atrioventricular Block and Impaired LV Function

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

[Long-Term Effect of Different Right Ventricular Apex Pacing Ratio on Heart Structure and Function of Patients with Dual Chamber Pacemaker].

Is Right Ventricular Outflow Tract Pacing Superior To Right Ventricular Apex Pacing? A Long-Term Follow-Up Study

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

The impact of chronic right ventricular apical pacing on cardiac function in patients with third degree atrioventricular block

Pacemaker-Related Factors and Outcomes of Fontan Patients ― Impact of Paced QRS Duration ―

Long-term outcomes of TAVI patients undergoing different pacing modality: LBBAP versus RVP

Long-term outcomes in young patients with atrioventricular block of unknown aetiology

AV‐optimized conduction system pacing for treatment of AV dromotropathy: A randomized, cross‐over study

Atrial Pacing Affects Left Atrial Morphological and Functional Parameters Early after Pacemaker Implantation

Incidence of arrhythmias and impact of permanent pacemaker implantation in hospitalizations with transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Study of right atrial and right ventricular function in dual chamber pacemaker patients

B-PO01-022 EXPLORING THE OPTIMAL PACING MODALITY IN PATIENTS WITH HIGH-GRADE ATRIOVENTRICULAR BLOCK AND RIGHT BUNDLE BRANCH BLOCK PATTERN: A PILOT STUDY

A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Left Bundle Branch Pacing, His Bundle Branch Pacing, and Right Ventricular Pacing for Atrioventricular Block