Myocardial work parameters in left bundle branch area pacing versus other pacing techniques: a systematic review and aggregate comparative analysis
- PMID: 40491894
- PMCID: PMC12146104
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2025.101683
Myocardial work parameters in left bundle branch area pacing versus other pacing techniques: a systematic review and aggregate comparative analysis
Abstract
Cardiac conduction disease often necessitates permanent pacemaker implantation. While right ventricular pacing (RVP) effectively treats bradycardia, it may lead to adverse cardiac remodeling and heart failure. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has emerged as an alternative, potentially preserving myocardial function. Non-invasive myocardial work (MW) assessment provides valuable insights into left ventricular systolic function, energetics, and efficiency. This study systematically reviewed and analyzed MW parameters, comparing LBBAP to RVP and His bundle pacing (HBP). A meta-analysis of 241 patients across five studies examined four MW parameters-Global Work Index (GWI), Global Constructive Work (GCW), Global Wasted Work (GWW), and Global Work Efficiency (GWE)-at baseline, post-implantation, and last follow-up (median: 180 days, IQR: 7-360 days). At baseline, MW parameters were similar between LBBAP and RVP. Post-implantation, LBBAP preserved MW more effectively, showing significantly higher GWI than RVP (2250.0 ± 400.0 vs. 1600.0 ± 300.0 mmHg%, p = 0.027), a difference that remained significant at follow-up (p = 0.035). GWE was also significantly higher at follow-up (p = 0.011), while GCW and GWW showed no significant differences. MW parameters did not differ significantly between LBBAP and HBP (all p-values >0.05). These findings suggest that LBBAP provides superior MW preservation compared to RVP, with significant benefits in GWI and GWE, while demonstrating comparable performance to HBP.
Keywords: Cardiac pacing; His bundle pacing; Left bundle branch pacing; Myocardial work; Right ventricular pacing; Systematic review.
© 2025 The Authors.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Figures
References
-
- Glikson M., Nielsen J.C., Kronborg M.B., Michowitz Y., Auricchio A., Barbash I.M., Barrabés J.A., Boriani G., Braunschweig F., Brignole M., Burri H., Coats A.J.S., Deharo J.C., Delgado V., Diller G.P., Israel C.W., Keren A., Knops R.E., Kotecha D., Leclercq C., Merkely B., Starck C., Thylén I., Tolosana J.M., ESC Scientific Document Group ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy. Eur. Heart. J. 2021;42(35):3427–3520. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab364. Erratum in: Eur Heart J. 2022 May 1;43(17):1651. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehac075. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Stams T.R.G., Dunnink A., van Everdingen W.M., Beekman H.D.M., van der Nagel R., Kok B., Bierhuizen M.F.A., Cramer M.J., Meine M., Vos M.A. Deleterious acute and chronic effects of bradycardic right ventricular apex pacing: consequences for arrhythmic outcome. Basic. Res. Cardiol. 2017 Jul;112(4):46. doi: 10.1007/s00395-017-0636-z. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Liu W.H., Chen M.C., Chen Y.L., Guo B.F., Pan K.L., Yang C.H., Chang H.W. Right ventricular apical pacing acutely impairs left ventricular function and induces mechanical dyssynchrony in patients with sick sinus syndrome: a real-time three-dimensional echocardiographic study. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2008 Mar;21(3):224–229. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2007.08.045. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Sarvari S.I., Sitges M., Sanz M., Tolosana Viu J.M., Edvardsen T., Stokke T.M., Mont L., Bijnens B. Left ventricular dysfunction is related to the presence and extent of a septal flash in patients with right ventricular pacing. Europace. 2017 Feb 1;19(2):289–296. doi: 10.1093/europace/euw020. - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous
