Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Netherlands Heart Journal 5/2022

Open Access 05-04-2022 | Commentary

Left bundle branch area pacing: ready for prime time?

Auteur: S. A. J. Timmer

Gepubliceerd in: Netherlands Heart Journal | Uitgave 5/2022

share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
insite
ZOEKEN
In this issue of the Netherlands Heart Journal, Heckman and colleagues describe the feasibility and electrical properties of left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) [1]. In recent years, LBBAP has gained considerable attention worldwide as a pacing strategy in patients with atrioventricular block to reduce the risk of pacing-induced heart failure. LBBAP is a form of conduction system pacing (CSP) in which stimulation of the left bundle branch and/or left side of the interventricular septum with a permanent pacing lead maintains physiological electrical activation of the left ventricle [2]. LBBAP is a relatively new technique that was introduced to a wide audience by Huang et al. in 2019 and serves as an alternative to His bundle pacing (HBP) for preventing intraventricular dyssynchrony associated with traditional right ventricular pacing (RVP) [3]. In contrast to HBP, which targets a small zone in the membranous septum, the pacing lead in LBBAP is advanced through the septum well below the level of the tricuspid annulus, aiming at the bifurcation of His into the right and left bundle branches. This results in a larger target area, which is also less challenging to capture, seeing that the LBB is not encased in fibrous, non-conductive tissue as is the case with the bundle of His [4]. Therefore, LBBAP is perceived to be a more accessible/forgiving technique, suffering to a much lesser degree from potential drawbacks such as longer procedural time, higher pacing threshold, and R‑wave sensing issues associated with HBP [5, 6]. Both techniques are becoming increasingly popular in the Netherlands as well and especially LBBAP is experiencing exponential growth for the aforementioned reasons. Currently, CSP is being performed in approximately 20 Dutch clinics.
The majority of publications on LBBAP are international cohort studies and show high acute success rates for implantation, a low threshold during follow-up and surprisingly few complications, in line with the study by Heckman et al. [7]. In general, LBBAP results in fast and homogeneous activation of the left ventricle and is characterised by an rSR’ pattern in lead V1 together with a short left ventricular activation time (LVAT). More specifically, LBBAP is a collective term comprising various types of LV septal capture with and without direct stimulation of the specialised conduction system [8]. Interestingly, even without clear evidence of LBB capture a relatively short LVAT can be obtained by pacing the LV endocardium, albeit 10–15 ms longer [9]. This raises questions: Which type of capture is preferred and what LVAT is short enough to prevent pacing-induced cardiomyopathy? No prospective studies have been performed on this matter. Another important question is who will benefit most from LBBAP. Of note is that LBBAP in lieu of RVP for bradycardia is an add-on preventive technique from which the majority of patients will not benefit, because they would never develop pacing-induced cardiomyopathy in the first place. And if at the same time fluoroscopy times are longer and material costs are higher, this does not seem to justify an all-comer approach. Currently, the first randomised clinical trial comparing RVP with LBBAP is underway (LEAP; clinicaltrials.gov NCT04595487), hoping to answer some of these burning questions.
The most widely used pacing electrode for LBBAP is the 3830 (SelectSecure, Medtronic). This thin, lumen-less lead with a fixed helix design relies entirely on a guiding catheter for placement. The Medtronic C315 fixed curve workhorse sheath was primarily designed for HBP but can be easily employed for LBBAP as well. More recently, other medical device companies have introduced CSP tools (e.g. Biotronik Selectra 3D catheter, Boston Scientific Site Selective Pacing Catheters). These catheters have a larger diameter than the C315 sheath to facilitate passage of a traditional, stylet-driven pacing lead. The combination of a stiffer guiding sheath and stylet-driven pacing lead may provide better stability and forward push to penetrate the septum, which can occasionally be cumbersome with the Medtronic 3830 in areas with extensive scarring or fibrosis. Emerging data suggest comparable success rates, electrical properties and safety aspects to those of the Medtronic 3830 [10]. It should be noted that long-term follow-up data on lead survival for LBBAP are not available, although short-term data are reassuring. Nonetheless, the intraseptal fixation of the lead tip creates a hinge point with the lead body and will put additional mechanical strain on the conductors. Either way, the growing number of implanted 3830 leads will be accompanied by a larger number of patients requiring lead extraction. The deep intraseptal fixation together with the non-retractable helix design has raised concerns regarding extractability, although case reports suggest extraction with commercially available tools is feasible [11].
There is no doubt that LBBAP has great potential in the field of cardiac pacing. Nevertheless, many aspects need further refinement, and for LBBAP to reach prime time there is an urgent need for solid clinical evidence.

Conflict of interest

S. A. J. Timmer is a consultant for Medtronic.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​.
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Onze productaanbevelingen

Netherlands Heart Journal

Het Netherlands Heart Journal wordt uitgegeven in samenwerking met de Nederlandse Vereniging voor Cardiologie en de Nederlandse Hartstichting. Het tijdschrift is Engelstalig en wordt gratis beschikbaa ...

Literatuur
2.
go back to reference Li Y, Chen K, Dai Y, et al. Left bundle branch pacing for symptomatic bradycardia: implant success rate, safety, and pacing characteristics. Heart Rhythm. 2019;16:1758–65.CrossRef Li Y, Chen K, Dai Y, et al. Left bundle branch pacing for symptomatic bradycardia: implant success rate, safety, and pacing characteristics. Heart Rhythm. 2019;16:1758–65.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Huang W, Chen X, Su L, et al. A beginner’s guide to permanent left bundle branch pacing. Heart Rhythm. 2019;16:1–6.CrossRef Huang W, Chen X, Su L, et al. A beginner’s guide to permanent left bundle branch pacing. Heart Rhythm. 2019;16:1–6.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Nagarajan VD, Ho SY, Ernst S. Anatomical considerations for His bundle pacing. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2019;12:e6897.CrossRef Nagarajan VD, Ho SY, Ernst S. Anatomical considerations for His bundle pacing. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2019;12:e6897.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Padala SK, Ellenbogen KA. Left bundle branch pacing is the best approach to physiological pacing. Heart Rhythm O2. 2020;1:59–67.CrossRef Padala SK, Ellenbogen KA. Left bundle branch pacing is the best approach to physiological pacing. Heart Rhythm O2. 2020;1:59–67.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Teigeler T, Kolominsky J, Vo C, et al. Intermediate-term performance and safety of His-bundle pacing leads: a single-center experience. Heart Rhythm. 2021;18:743–9.CrossRef Teigeler T, Kolominsky J, Vo C, et al. Intermediate-term performance and safety of His-bundle pacing leads: a single-center experience. Heart Rhythm. 2021;18:743–9.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Su L, Wang S, Wu S, et al. Long-term safety and feasibility of left bundle branch pacing in a large single center study. Circ Arrhythmia Electrophysiol. 2021;14:e9261.CrossRef Su L, Wang S, Wu S, et al. Long-term safety and feasibility of left bundle branch pacing in a large single center study. Circ Arrhythmia Electrophysiol. 2021;14:e9261.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Wu S, Sharma PS, Huang W. Novel left ventricular cardiac synchronization: left ventricular septal pacing or left bundle branch pacing? Europace. 2020;22(Suppl2):ii10–ii8.CrossRef Wu S, Sharma PS, Huang W. Novel left ventricular cardiac synchronization: left ventricular septal pacing or left bundle branch pacing? Europace. 2020;22(Suppl2):ii10–ii8.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Curila K, Jurak P, Jastrzebski M, et al. Left bundle branch pacing compared to left ventricular septal myocardial pacing increases interventricular dyssynchrony but accelerates left ventricular lateral wall depolarization. Heart Rhythm. 2021;18:1281–9.CrossRef Curila K, Jurak P, Jastrzebski M, et al. Left bundle branch pacing compared to left ventricular septal myocardial pacing increases interventricular dyssynchrony but accelerates left ventricular lateral wall depolarization. Heart Rhythm. 2021;18:1281–9.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Pooter JD, Calle S, Timmermans F, et al. Left bundle branch area pacing using stylet-driven pacing leads with a new delivery sheath: a comparison with lumen-less leads. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32:439–48.CrossRef Pooter JD, Calle S, Timmermans F, et al. Left bundle branch area pacing using stylet-driven pacing leads with a new delivery sheath: a comparison with lumen-less leads. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32:439–48.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Vijayaraman P. Extraction of left bundle branch pacing lead. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;6:903–4.CrossRef Vijayaraman P. Extraction of left bundle branch pacing lead. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;6:903–4.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Left bundle branch area pacing: ready for prime time?
Auteur
S. A. J. Timmer
Publicatiedatum
05-04-2022
Uitgeverij
Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
Gepubliceerd in
Netherlands Heart Journal / Uitgave 5/2022
Print ISSN: 1568-5888
Elektronisch ISSN: 1876-6250
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12471-022-01681-z

Andere artikelen Uitgave 5/2022

Netherlands Heart Journal 5/2022 Naar de uitgave