Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Conventional Pacing in Patients with Advanced Atrioventricular Conduction Abnormalities: a Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is an emerging pacing method, which may prevent the deleterious effects of right ventricular pacing. The aim of this study is to compare the effects of LBBAP with right ventricular septal pacing (RVSP) in patients with advanced atrioventricular conduction abnormalities and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction.

METHODS

The effect of pacing was evaluated by echocardiographic indices of dyssynchrony, including global myocardial work efficiency (GWE) and peak systolic dispersion (PSD). The primary endpoint was GWE postprocedural, at 3, 6 and 12 months after the procedure.

RESULTS

Twenty patients received LBBAP and 18 RVSP. Complete follow-up was accomplished in 37 patients (97.4%), due to the death of a patient (RVSP arm), from non-related cause. GWE was significantly increased in the group of LBBAP compared to RVSP at all timepoints (90.8% in LBBAP vs 85.8% in RVSP group at 12 months, p=0.01). PSD was numerically lower in the LBBAP arm at all timepoints, yet not statistically significant (56.4 msec in LBBP vs 65.1 msec in RVSP arm at 12 months, p=0.178). The implantation time was increased (median 93 min in LBBAP vs 45 min in RVSP group, p<0.01), along with fluoroscopy time and dose area product (DAP), in the arm of LBBAP. There were no severe perioperative acute complications in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

LBBAP is an emerging and safe technique for patients with a pacing indication. Despite the longer procedural and fluoroscopy time, as well as higher DAP, LBBAP seems to offer better left ventricular synchrony compared to RVSP, according to GWE measurements.

Anticoagulation in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

BACKGROUND

Both atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are highly prevalent among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Until recently, warfarin was the most commonly prescribed oral anticoagulant. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have important advantages and have been shown to be noninferior to warfarin with respect to stroke prevention or recurrent VTE in the general population, with lower bleeding rates. This review article will provide available evidence on the use of DOACs in patients with CKD.

SUMMARY

In post hoc analyses of major randomized studies with DOACs for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, in the subgroup of participants with moderate CKD, defined as a creatinine clearance (CrCl) of 30-50 mL/min, dabigatran 150 mg and apixaban were associated with lower rates of stroke and systemic embolism, whereas apixaban and edoxaban were associated with lower bleeding and mortality rates, compared with warfarin. In retrospective observational studies in patients with advanced CKD (defined as a CrCl <30 mL/min) and atrial fibrillation, DOACs had similar efficacy with warfarin with numerically lower bleeding rates. All agents warrant dose adjustment in moderate-to-severe CKD. In patients on maintenance dialysis, the VALKYRIE trial, which was designed initially to study the effect of vitamin K on vascular calcification progression, established superiority for rivaroxaban compared with a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) in the extension phase. Two other clinical trials using apixaban (AXADIA and RENAL-AF) in this population were inconclusive due to recruitment challenges and low event rates. In post hoc analyses of randomized studies with DOACs in patients with VTE, in the subgroup of participants with moderate CKD at baseline, edoxaban was associated with lower rates of recurrent VTE, whereas rivaroxaban and dabigatran were associated with lower and higher bleeding rates, respectively, as compared to warfarin.

KEY MESSAGES

DOACs have revolutionized the management of atrial fibrillation and VTE, and they should be preferred over warfarin in patients with moderate-to-severe CKD with appropriate dose adjustment. Therapeutic drug monitoring with a valid technique may be considered to guide clinical management in individualized cases. Current evidence questions the need for oral anticoagulation in patients on maintenance dialysis with atrial fibrillation as both DOACs and VKAs are associated with high rates of major bleeding.

Safety and efficacy of left bundle branch area pacing compared with right ventricular pacing in patients with bradyarrhythmia and conduction system disorders: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Right Ventricular Pacing (RVP) may have detrimental effects in ventricular function. Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing (LBBAP) is a new pacing strategy that appears to have better results. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the safety and efficacy of LBBAP vs RVP in patients with bradyarrhythmia and conduction system disorders.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and Pubmed databases were searched for studies comparing LBBAP with RVP. Outcomes were all-cause mortality, atrial fibrillation (AF) occurrence, heart failure hospitalizations (HFH) and complications. QRS duration, mechanical synchrony and LVEF changes were also assessed. Pairwise meta-analysis was conducted using random and fixed effects models.

RESULTS

Twenty-five trials with 4250 patients (2127 LBBAP) were included in the analysis. LBBAP was associated with lower risk for HFH (RR:0.33, CI 95%:0.21 to 0.50; p < 0.001), all-cause mortality (RR:0.52 CI 95%:0.34 to 0.80; p = 0.003), and AF occurrence (RR:0.43 CI 95%:0.27 to 0.68; p < 0.001) than RVP. Lead related complications were not different between the two groups (p = 0.780). QRSd was shorter in the LBBAP group at follow-up (WMD: -32.20 msec, CI 95%: -40.70 to -23.71; p < 0.001) and LBBAP achieved better intraventricular mechanical synchrony than RVP (SMD: -1.77, CI 95%: -2.45 to -1.09; p < 0.001). LBBAP had similar pacing thresholds (p = 0.860) and higher R wave amplitudes (p = 0.009) than RVP.

CONCLUSIONS

LBBAP has better clinical outcomes, preserves ventricular electrical and mechanical synchrony and has excellent pacing parameters, with no difference in complications compared to RVP.