Andrea Mazza1, Maria Grazia Bendini1, Raffaele De Cristofaro1, Mariolina Lovecchio2, Sergio Valsecchi2, Massimo Leggio3, Giuseppe Boriani4. 1. Cardiology Department, Santa Maria della Stella Hospital, Orvieto, Italy. 2. CRM department, Boston Scientific, Milan, Italy. 3. Salus Infirmorum Clinic, San Filippo Neri Hospital, Rome, Italy. 4. Cardiology Division, Department of Diagnostics, Clinical and Public Health Medicine, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena Hospital, Modena, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that the presence of left bundle branch block (LBBB) is associated with an increased risk of cardiac mortality and heart failure (HF). Recently, new criteria to define strict LBBB have been proposed: QRS duration ≥140 ms for men and ≥130 ms for women, along with mid-QRS notching or slurring in ≥2 contiguous leads. HYPOTHESIS: We assessed the prevalence and prognostic significance of LBBB according to classical (QRS duration ≥120ms) and strict criteria in permanent pacemaker patients. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 723 consecutive patients who had undergone single- or dual-chamber pacemaker implantation at the study center from July 2002 to December 2014. Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% or a prior diagnosis of HF were excluded. RESULTS: LBBB was reported in 54 (7%) patients, and strict-LBBB in 15 (2%) patients. During a median follow-up of 48 months (range, 18-92 months), 147 (20%) patients reached the combined endpoint of death or HF hospitalization. Patients with LBBB and those with strict-LBBB displayed significantly higher rates of death or HF hospitalization (log-rank test, all P < 0.0001). In particular, strict-LBBB was associated with the worst outcome. The presence of LBBB according to classical definition criteria (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.98, confidence interval [CI]: 1.23-3.19, P = 0.005) and to strict criteria (HR = 2.20; CI: 1.04-4.65; P = 0.039) were both confirmed as independent predictors of death or HF hospitalization after adjustment for relevant clinical covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who had undergone standard pacemaker implantation, the prevalence of LBBB was 7% according to classical definition criteria and 2% according to strict criteria. The presence of LBBB, and particularly of strict-LBBB, at the baseline predicted a poor outcome in terms of death or HF hospitalization.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that the presence of left bundle branch block (LBBB) is associated with an increased risk of cardiac mortality and heart failure (HF). Recently, new criteria to define strict LBBB have been proposed: QRS duration ≥140 ms for men and ≥130 ms for women, along with mid-QRS notching or slurring in ≥2 contiguous leads. HYPOTHESIS: We assessed the prevalence and prognostic significance of LBBB according to classical (QRS duration ≥120ms) and strict criteria in permanent pacemaker patients. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 723 consecutive patients who had undergone single- or dual-chamber pacemaker implantation at the study center from July 2002 to December 2014. Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% or a prior diagnosis of HF were excluded. RESULTS: LBBB was reported in 54 (7%) patients, and strict-LBBB in 15 (2%) patients. During a median follow-up of 48 months (range, 18-92 months), 147 (20%) patients reached the combined endpoint of death or HF hospitalization. Patients with LBBB and those with strict-LBBB displayed significantly higher rates of death or HF hospitalization (log-rank test, all P < 0.0001). In particular, strict-LBBB was associated with the worst outcome. The presence of LBBB according to classical definition criteria (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.98, confidence interval [CI]: 1.23-3.19, P = 0.005) and to strict criteria (HR = 2.20; CI: 1.04-4.65; P = 0.039) were both confirmed as independent predictors of death or HF hospitalization after adjustment for relevant clinical covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who had undergone standard pacemaker implantation, the prevalence of LBBB was 7% according to classical definition criteria and 2% according to strict criteria. The presence of LBBB, and particularly of strict-LBBB, at the baseline predicted a poor outcome in terms of death or HF hospitalization.
Authors: Borys Surawicz; Rory Childers; Barbara J Deal; Leonard S Gettes; James J Bailey; Anton Gorgels; E William Hancock; Mark Josephson; Paul Kligfield; Jan A Kors; Peter Macfarlane; Jay W Mason; David M Mirvis; Peter Okin; Olle Pahlm; Pentti M Rautaharju; Gerard van Herpen; Galen S Wagner; Hein Wellens Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2009-03-17 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Wojciech Zareba; Helmut Klein; Iwona Cygankiewicz; W Jackson Hall; Scott McNitt; Mary Brown; David Cannom; James P Daubert; Michael Eldar; Michael R Gold; Jeffrey J Goldberger; Ilan Goldenberg; Edgar Lichstein; Heinz Pitschner; Mayer Rashtian; Scott Solomon; Sami Viskin; Paul Wang; Arthur J Moss Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-02-28 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Bruce L Wilkoff; James R Cook; Andrew E Epstein; H Leon Greene; Alfred P Hallstrom; Henry Hsia; Steven P Kutalek; Arjun Sharma Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-12-25 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Douglas S Lee; Philimon Gona; Ramachandran S Vasan; Martin G Larson; Emelia J Benjamin; Thomas J Wang; Jack V Tu; Daniel Levy Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-06-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Gervasio A Lamas; Kerry L Lee; Michael O Sweeney; Russell Silverman; Angel Leon; Raymond Yee; Roger A Marinchak; Greg Flaker; Eleanor Schron; E John Orav; Anne S Hellkamp; Stephen Greer; John McAnulty; Kenneth Ellenbogen; Frederick Ehlert; Roger A Freedman; N A Mark Estes; Arnold Greenspon; Lee Goldman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-06-13 Impact factor: 91.245