IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i21p11721-d674478.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hemodynamic Effects of Permanent His Bundle Pacing Compared to Right Ventricular Pacing Assessed by Two-Dimensional Speckle-Tracking Echocardiography

Author

Listed:
  • Jedrzej Michalik

    (Kashubian Center for Heart and Vascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology and Interventional Angiology, Pomeranian Hospitals, 84-200 Wejherowo, Poland)

  • Alicja Dabrowska-Kugacka

    (Department of Cardiology and Electrotherapy, Medical University of Gdansk, 80-214 Gdansk, Poland)

  • Katarzyna Kosmalska

    (Department of Cardiology, Pomeranian Hospitals, 81-348 Gdynia, Poland)

  • Roman Moroz

    (Kashubian Center for Heart and Vascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology and Interventional Angiology, Pomeranian Hospitals, 84-200 Wejherowo, Poland)

  • Adrian Kot

    (Kashubian Center for Heart and Vascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology and Interventional Angiology, Pomeranian Hospitals, 84-200 Wejherowo, Poland)

  • Ewa Lewicka

    (Department of Cardiology and Electrotherapy, Medical University of Gdansk, 80-214 Gdansk, Poland)

  • Marek Szolkiewicz

    (Kashubian Center for Heart and Vascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology and Interventional Angiology, Pomeranian Hospitals, 84-200 Wejherowo, Poland)

Abstract

We compared the effects of right ventricular (RVP; n = 26) and His bundle (HBP; n = 24) pacing in patients with atrioventricular conduction disorders and preserved LVEF. Postoperatively (1D), and after six months (6M), the patients underwent global longitudinal strain (GLS) and peak systolic dispersion (PSD) evaluation with 2D speckle-tracking echocardiography, assessment of left atrial volume index (LAVI) and QRS duration (QRSd), and sensing/pacing parameter testing. The RVP threshold was lower than the HBP threshold at 1D (0.65 ± 0.13 vs. 1.05 ± 0.20 V, p < 0.001), and then it remained stable, while the HBP threshold increased at 6M (1.05 ± 0.20 vs. 1.31 ± 0.30 V, p < 0.001). The RVP R-wave was higher than the HBP R-wave at 1D (11.52 ± 2.99 vs. 4.82 ± 1.41 mV, p < 0.001). The RVP R-wave also remained stable, while the HBP R-wave decreased at 6M (4.82 ± 1.41 vs. 4.50 ± 1.09 mV, p < 0.02). RVP QRSd was longer than HBP QRSd at 6M (145.0 ± 11.1 vs. 112.3 ± 9.3 ms, p < 0.001). The absolute value of RVP GLS decreased at 6M (16.32 ± 2.57 vs. 14.03 ± 3.78%, p < 0.001), and HBP GLS remained stable. Simultaneously, RVP PSD increased (72.53 ± 24.15 vs. 88.33 ± 30.51 ms, p < 0.001) and HBP PSD decreased (96.28 ± 33.99 vs. 84.95 ± 28.98 ms, p < 0.001) after 6 months. RVP LAVI increased (26.73 ± 5.7 vs. 28.40 ± 6.4 mL/m 2 , p < 0.05), while HBP LAVI decreased at 6M (30.03 ± 7.8 vs. 28.73 ± 8.7 mL/m 2 , p < 0.01). These results confirm that HBP does not disrupt ventricular synchrony and provides advantages over RVP.

Suggested Citation

  • Jedrzej Michalik & Alicja Dabrowska-Kugacka & Katarzyna Kosmalska & Roman Moroz & Adrian Kot & Ewa Lewicka & Marek Szolkiewicz, 2021. "Hemodynamic Effects of Permanent His Bundle Pacing Compared to Right Ventricular Pacing Assessed by Two-Dimensional Speckle-Tracking Echocardiography," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-9, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11721-:d:674478
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11721/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11721/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11721-:d:674478. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.