Safety and efficacy of His-Purkinje system pacing in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the His-Purkinje system pacing (HPCSP) in the treatment of individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF) complicated by heart failure (HF).AimTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of the His-Purkinje system pacing (HPCSP) in the treatment of individuals with atrial f...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine Vol. 10; p. 1233694
Main Authors Guan, Lin, Wang, Chuanhe, Guan, Xueqing, Cheng, Gong, Sun, Zhijun
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Frontiers Media S.A 13.09.2023
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN2297-055X
2297-055X
DOI10.3389/fcvm.2023.1233694

Cover

More Information
Summary:To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the His-Purkinje system pacing (HPCSP) in the treatment of individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF) complicated by heart failure (HF).AimTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of the His-Purkinje system pacing (HPCSP) in the treatment of individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF) complicated by heart failure (HF).The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase databases were searched through September 1, 2022. The literature was initially screened based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The baseline characteristics of the subjects, implantation success rate, New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDd), QRS duration, pacing threshold, and impedance were extracted and summarized; statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.MethodsThe PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase databases were searched through September 1, 2022. The literature was initially screened based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The baseline characteristics of the subjects, implantation success rate, New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDd), QRS duration, pacing threshold, and impedance were extracted and summarized; statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.In all, 22 articles were included, involving 1,445 patients. Compared to biventricular pacing (BiVP), HPCSP resulted in improved cardiac function, including increased ejection fraction (MD = 5.69, 95% CI: 0.78-10.60, P = 0.02) and decreased LVEDd (MD = -3.50, 95% CI: -7.05-0.05, P = 0.05). It was also correlated with shorter QRS duration (MD = -38.30, 95% CI: -60.71--15.88, P < 0.01) and reduced all-cause mortality and rehospitalization events (RR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.57-0.91, P < 0.01) in patients. Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) lowered the pacing threshold (MD = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.25-0.69; P < 0.01), and there was no statistical difference in the rate of endpoint events when comparing these two physiologic pacing modalities (RR = 1.56, 95% CI: 0.87-2.80, P = 0.14).ResultsIn all, 22 articles were included, involving 1,445 patients. Compared to biventricular pacing (BiVP), HPCSP resulted in improved cardiac function, including increased ejection fraction (MD = 5.69, 95% CI: 0.78-10.60, P = 0.02) and decreased LVEDd (MD = -3.50, 95% CI: -7.05-0.05, P = 0.05). It was also correlated with shorter QRS duration (MD = -38.30, 95% CI: -60.71--15.88, P < 0.01) and reduced all-cause mortality and rehospitalization events (RR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.57-0.91, P < 0.01) in patients. Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) lowered the pacing threshold (MD = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.25-0.69; P < 0.01), and there was no statistical difference in the rate of endpoint events when comparing these two physiologic pacing modalities (RR = 1.56, 95% CI: 0.87-2.80, P = 0.14).The safety and efficacy of HPCSP in patients with AF and HF were verified in this meta-analysis. HPCSP can reverse cardiac remodeling and has great clinical application value. Relatively speaking, His-bundle pacing (HBP) can maintain better ventricular electro-mechanical synchronization, and the pacing parameters of LBBP are more stable.ConclusionThe safety and efficacy of HPCSP in patients with AF and HF were verified in this meta-analysis. HPCSP can reverse cardiac remodeling and has great clinical application value. Relatively speaking, His-bundle pacing (HBP) can maintain better ventricular electro-mechanical synchronization, and the pacing parameters of LBBP are more stable.PROSPERO (CRD42022336109).Systematic Review RegistrationPROSPERO (CRD42022336109).
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ObjectType-Review-3
content type line 23
Edited by: Alexander H. Maass, University Medical Center Groningen, Netherlands
Reviewed by: Helmut Ulrich Klein, University of Rochester, United States Xueying Chen, Fudan University, China
Abbreviations BVP, biventricular pacing; HBP, His-bundle pacing; LBBP, left bundle branch pacing; HPCSP, His-Purkinje system pacing; CRT, cardiac resynchronization therapy; CVD, cardiovascular diseases; AF, atrial fibrillation; HF, heart failure; NYHA, New York heart association; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; LVEDd, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter; QRSd, QRS duration; NOS, Newcastle-Ottawa scale; CI, confidence interval; RR, risk ratio; MD, mean difference.
ISSN:2297-055X
2297-055X
DOI:10.3389/fcvm.2023.1233694