Literature DB >> 25189602

Effect of right ventricular pacing lead site on left ventricular function in patients with high-grade atrioventricular block: results of the Protect-Pace study.

Gerald C Kaye1, Nicholas J Linker2, Thomas H Marwick3, Lucy Pollock4, Laura Graham4, Erika Pouliot5, Jan Poloniecki6, Michael Gammage7.   

Abstract

AIM: Chronic right ventricle (RV) apical (RVA) pacing is standard treatment for an atrioventricular (AV) block but may be deleterious to left ventricle (LV) systolic function. Previous clinical studies of non-apical pacing have produced conflicting results. The aim of this randomized, prospective, international, multicentre trial was to compare change in LV ejection fraction (LVEF) between right ventricular apical and high septal (RVHS) pacing over a 2-year study period. METHODS AND
RESULTS: We randomized 240 patients (age 74 ± 11 years, 67% male) with a high-grade AV block requiring >90% ventricular pacing and preserved baseline LVEF >50%, to receive pacing at the RVA (n = 120) or RVHS (n = 120). At 2 years, LVEF decreased in both the RVA (57 ± 9 to 55 ± 9%, P = 0.047) and the RVHS groups (56 ± 10 to 54 ± 10%, P = 0.0003). However, there was no significant difference in intra-patient change in LVEF between confirmed RVA (n = 85) and RVHS (n = 83) lead position (P = 0.43). There were no significant differences in heart failure hospitalization, mortality, the burden of atrial fibrillation, or plasma brain natriutetic peptide levels between the two groups. A significantly greater time was required to place the lead in the RVHS position (70 ± 25 vs. 56 ± 24 min, P < 0.0001) with longer fluoroscopy times (11 ± 7 vs. 5 ± 4 min, P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: In patients with a high-grade AV block and preserved LV function requiring a high percentage of ventricular pacing, RVHS pacing does not provide a protective effect on left ventricular function over RVA pacing in the first 2 years. PROTECT-PACE: ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00461734. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
© The Author 2014. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Left ventricular function; Right ventricular apical pacing; Right ventricular high septal pacing; Select site pacing

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25189602     DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu304

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Heart J        ISSN: 0195-668X            Impact factor:   29.983


  35 in total

1.  Feasibility and safety of both His bundle pacing and left bundle branch area pacing in atrial fibrillation patients: intermediate term follow-up.

Authors:  Yang Ye; Kai Zhang; Ying Yang; Dongmei Jiang; Yiwen Pan; Xia Sheng; Bei Wang; Chan Yu; Zuwen Zhang; Jiefang Zhang; Li Wang; Jiangfen Jiang; Yaxun Sun; Qiang Liu; Yunxian Cheng; Bo Gao; Min Wang; Hong He; Chenyang Jiang; Guosheng Fu
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2021-03-15       Impact factor: 1.900

2.  Incidence and predictors of pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy with comparison between apical and non-apical right ventricular pacing sites.

Authors:  Raghav Bansal; Neeraj Parakh; Anunay Gupta; Rajnish Juneja; Nitish Naik; Rakesh Yadav; Gautam Sharma; Ambuj Roy; Sunil Kumar Verma; Vinay Kumar Bahl
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2019-07-30       Impact factor: 1.900

3.  Common sense or evidence: an optimal place for right and left ventricular leads?

Authors:  I Eli Ovsyshcher
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2015-04-16       Impact factor: 1.900

4.  Letter to the Editor: His Bundle Pacing: A New Frontier in the Treatment of Heart Failure.

Authors:  Zografos Theodoros
Journal:  Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev       Date:  2018-08

Review 5.  His Bundle Pacing: Techniques and Outcomes.

Authors:  Mads Brix Kronborg; Jens Cosedis Nielsen
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 2.931

6.  Choice of Ventricular Pacing Site: the End of Non-physiological, Apical Ventricular Pacing?

Authors:  Demosthenes G Katritsis
Journal:  Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev       Date:  2017-12

Review 7.  [ESC guidelines 2021 on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy : What's new?]

Authors:  Julia Vogler; Ahmad Keelani; Anna Traub; Roland Richard Tilz
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 1.443

8.  Risk factors of pacing dependence and cardiac dysfunction in patients with permanent pacemaker implantation.

Authors:  Ziqing Yu; Yixiu Liang; Zilong Xiao; Yucheng Wang; Pei Bao; Chunyu Zhang; Enyong Su; Minghui Li; Xueying Chen; Shengmei Qin; Ruizhen Chen; Yangang Su; Junbo Ge
Journal:  ESC Heart Fail       Date:  2022-04-26

9.  Risk factors of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy-Insights from lead position.

Authors:  Tomotaka Yoshiyama; Kenji Shimeno; Yusuke Hayashi; Asahiro Ito; Shinichi Iwata; Yoshiki Matsumura; Yasuhiro Izumiya; Yukio Abe; Shoichi Ehara; Takahiko Naruko
Journal:  J Arrhythm       Date:  2022-04-07

Review 10.  How His bundle pacing prevents and reverses heart failure induced by right ventricular pacing.

Authors:  Alfred Stanley; Constantine Athanasuleas; Gerald Buckberg
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2021-11       Impact factor: 4.214

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.