Download PDF
Aktuelle Kardiologie 2024; 13(01): 65-72
DOI: 10.1055/a-2232-4968
Kurzübersicht

Conduction System Pacing: historische und aktuelle Entwicklungen der Schrittmachertherapie

Conduction System Pacing: Historical and Current Developments of Pacemaker Therapy
Davit Saghabalyan 
1   Kardiologie, Evangelisches Waldkrankenhaus Spandau, Berlin, Deutschland (Ringgold ID: RIN37021)
,
Gerd Baldenhofer
1   Kardiologie, Evangelisches Waldkrankenhaus Spandau, Berlin, Deutschland (Ringgold ID: RIN37021)
,
Ivan Diaz Ramirez
1   Kardiologie, Evangelisches Waldkrankenhaus Spandau, Berlin, Deutschland (Ringgold ID: RIN37021)
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Corrected by:

Erratum: Conduction System Pacing: historische und aktuelle Entwicklungen der SchrittmachertherapieAktuelle Kardiologie 2024; 13(01): e1-e1
DOI: 10.1055/a-2268-1986

Zusammenfassung

Die Schrittmachertherapie mittels Stimulation des spezifischen Reizleitungssystems (Conduction System Pacing) nimmt Fahrt auf. Die randomisierten Studien, die den tatsächlichen Nutzen dieser Methode beweisen sollen, sind schon unterwegs. Die bisherigen Daten weisen auf relevante Vorteile gegenüber konventionellen Methoden hin, jedoch bleiben die anfallenden Zusatzkosten, aufwendige Implantationstechnik und die im Vergleich zur rechtsventrikulären Stimulation niedrigere Erfolgsrate neben den noch fehlenden Empfehlungen der ESC-Schrittmacherleitlinie die entscheidenden Hindernisse für die breitere Verwendung des Conduction System Pacing in Deutschland. In Anbetracht des 2023 zu diesem Thema publizierten Konsensuspapiers der EHRA möchten wir nun die Erfahrungen der letzten Jahrzehnte im Bereich der Herzschrittmachertherapie und die aktuellen Entwicklungen zusammenfassen.

Abstract

Pacemaker therapy through stimulation of the specific conduction system is picking up momentum as randomized studies aiming to substantiate its actual benefits are still ongoing. While existing data suggest notable advantages over conventional methods, additional costs, intricate implantation techniques, lower success rates compared to right ventricular stimulation, and the absence of recommendations from the ESC pacemaker guidelines hinder its wider adoption in Germany. Considering the recent EHRA consensus paper on this topic, we seek to compile experiences from recent decades in pacemaker therapy and summarize current developments.

Was ist wichtig?

Die Stimulation des Reizleitungssystems (Conduction System Pacing, CSP) ist eine physiologischere Alternative zur rechtsventrikulären Stimulation.

Die richtige Technik ist eine wichtige Voraussetzung für eine sichere und effektive Therapie.

Es bedarf noch weiterer, auch Langzeitstudien zu Sicherheit, Effektivität und Outcome, bevor diese Stimulationsmethoden breite Anwendung in Deutschland finden werden.

Schlüsselwörter

Schrittmacher - Linksschenkelblock - Kardiomyopathie - physiologische Stimulation

Keywords

left bundle branch block - cardiomyopathy - physiological pacing - pacemaker


Publication History

Article published online:
08 February 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Furman S, Schwedel JB. An intracardiac pacemaker for Stokes-Adams seizures. N Engl J Med 1959; 261: 943-948 DOI: 10.1056/NEJM195911052611904. (PMID: 16689837)
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Burkhoff D, Oikawa RY, Sagawa K. Influence of pacing site on canine left ventricular contraction. Am J Physiol 1986; 251: H428-435 DOI: 10.1152/ajpheart.1986.251.2.H428. (PMID: 3740295)
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Adomian GE, Beazell J. Myofibrillar disarray produced in normal hearts by chronic electrical pacing. Am Heart J 1986; 112: 79-83 DOI: 10.1016/0002-8703(86)90682-4. (PMID: 3728292)
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Sweeney MO, Hellkamp AS, Ellenbogen KA. et al. Adverse effect of ventricular pacing on heart failure and atrial fibrillation among patients with normal baseline QRS duration in a clinical trial of pacemaker therapy for sinus node dysfunction. Circulation 2003; 107: 2932-2937 DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000072769.17295.B1. (PMID: 12782566)
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Tayal B, Fruelund P, Sogaard P. et al. Incidence of heart failure after pacemaker implantation: a nationwide Danish Registry-based follow-up study. Eur Heart J 2019; 40: 3641-3648 DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz584. (PMID: 31504437)
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Takagi Y, Dumpis Y, Usui A. et al. Effects of proximal ventricular septal pacing on hemodynamics and ventricular activation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1999; 22: 1777-1781 DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1999.tb00410.x. (PMID: 10642131)
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Mera F, DeLurgio DB, Patterson RE. et al. A comparison of ventricular function during high right ventricular septal and apical pacing after his-bundle ablation for refractory atrial fibrillation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1999; 22: 1234-1239 DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1999.tb00606.x.
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Lieberman R, Grenz D, Mond HG. et al. Selective site pacing: defining and reaching the selected site. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2004; 27: 883-886 DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2004.00551.x. (PMID: 15189520)
    Google Scholar
  • 9 McGavigan AD, Roberts-Thomson KC, Hillock RJ. et al. Right ventricular outflow tract pacing: radiographic and electrocardiographic correlates of lead position. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2006; 29: 1063-1068 DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2006.00499.x. (PMID: 17038137)
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Mond HG, Hillock RJ, Stevenson IH. et al. The right ventricular outflow tract: the road to septal pacing. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2007; 30: 482-491 DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2007.00697.x. (PMID: 17437571)
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Hillock RJ, Mond HG. Pacing the right ventricular outflow tract septum: time to embrace the future. Europace 2012; 14: 28-35 DOI: 10.1093/europace/eur251. (PMID: 21846639)
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Shimony A, Eisenberg MJ, Filion KB. et al. Beneficial effects of right ventricular non-apical vs. apical pacing: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials. Europace 2012; 14: 81-91 DOI: 10.1093/europace/eur240. (PMID: 21798880)
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Kaye GC, Linker NJ, Marwick TH. et al. Effect of right ventricular pacing lead site on left ventricular function in patients with high-grade atrioventricular block: results of the Protect-Pace study. Eur Heart J 2015; 36: 856-862 DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu304. (PMID: 25189602)
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Kiehl EL, Makki T, Kumar R. et al. Incidence and predictors of right ventricular pacing-induced cardiomyopathy in patients with complete atrioventricular block and preserved left ventricular systolic function. Heart Rhythm 2016; 13: 2272-2278 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.09.027. (PMID: 27855853)
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Bansal R, Parakh N, Gupta A. et al. Incidence and predictors of pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy with comparison between apical and non-apical right ventricular pacing sites. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2019; 56: 63-70 DOI: 10.1007/s10840-019-00602-2. (PMID: 31363943)
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Chan NY, Yuen HC, Choy CC. et al. Left ventricular volumes and systolic function after long-term right ventricular pacing may be predicted by paced QRS duration, but not pacing site. Heart Lung Circ 2014; 23: 43-48 DOI: 10.1016/j.hlc.2013.04.122. (PMID: 23806197)
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Deshmukh P, Casavant DA, Romanyshyn M. et al. Permanent, direct His-bundle pacing: a novel approach to cardiac pacing in patients with normal His-Purkinje activation. Circulation 2000; 101: 869-877 DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.101.8.869. (PMID: 10694526)
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Huang W, Su L, Wu S. et al. Benefits of Permanent His Bundle Pacing Combined With Atrioventricular Node Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation Patients With Heart Failure With Both Preserved and Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction. J Am Heart Assoc 2017; 6: e005309 DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.116.005309. (PMID: 28365568)
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Vijayaraman P, Subzposh FA, Naperkowski A. Atrioventricular node ablation and His bundle pacing. Europace 2017; 19: iv10-iv16 DOI: 10.1093/europace/eux263. (PMID: 29220422)
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Kusumoto FM, Schoenfeld MH, Barrett C. et al. 2018 ACC/AHA/HRS Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Patients With Bradycardia and Cardiac Conduction Delay: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. Circulation 2019; 140: e382-e482 DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000628. (PMID: 30586772)
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Glikson M, Nielsen JC, Kronborg MB. et al. 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy. Eur Heart J 2021; 42: 3427-3520 DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab364. (PMID: 34455430)
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Narula OS. Longitudinal dissociation in the His bundle. Bundle branch block due to asynchronous conduction within the His bundle in man. Circulation 1977; 56: 996-1006 DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.56.6.996. (PMID: 923070)
    Google Scholar
  • 23 James TN, Sherf L. Fine structure of the His bundle. Circulation 1971; 44: 9-28 DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.44.1.9. (PMID: 5561420)
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Vijayaraman P, Chung MK, Dandamudi G. et al. His Bundle Pacing. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018; 72: 927-947 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.06.017. (PMID: 30115232)
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Lustgarten DL, Crespo EM, Arkhipova-Jenkins I. et al. His-bundle pacing versus biventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients: A crossover design comparison. Heart Rhythm 2015; 12: 1548-1557 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.03.048. (PMID: 25828601)
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Upadhyay GA, Vijayaraman P, Nayak HM. et al. On-treatment comparison between corrective His bundle pacing and biventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronization: A secondary analysis of the His-SYNC Pilot Trial. Heart Rhythm 2019; 16: 1797-1807 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.05.009. (PMID: 31096064)
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Huang W, Su L, Wu S. et al. A Novel Pacing Strategy With Low and Stable Output: Pacing the Left Bundle Branch Immediately Beyond the Conduction Block. Can J Cardiol 2017; 33: 1736.e1-1736.e3 DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2017.09.013. (PMID: 29173611)
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Chen K, Li Y, Dai Y. et al. Comparison of electrocardiogram characteristics and pacing parameters between left bundle branch pacing and right ventricular pacing in patients receiving pacemaker therapy. Europace 2019; 21: 673-680 DOI: 10.1093/europace/euy252. (PMID: 30462207)
    Google Scholar
  • 29 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: 1758-1765 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.05.014. (PMID: 31125667)
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Chen K, Li Y. How to implant left bundle branch pacing lead in routine clinical practice. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2019; 30: 2569-2577 DOI: 10.1111/jce.14190. (PMID: 31535747)
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Zhang W, Huang J, Qi Y. et al. Cardiac resynchronization therapy by left bundle branch area pacing in patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block. Heart Rhythm 2019; 16: 1783-1790 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.09.006. (PMID: 31513945)
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Burri H, Jastrzebski M, Cano Ó. et al. EHRA clinical consensus statement on conduction system pacing implantation: endorsed by the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), Canadian Heart Rhythm Society (CHRS), and Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). Europace 2023; 25: 1208-1236 DOI: 10.1093/europace/euad043. (PMID: 37061848)
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Chung MK, Patton KK, Lau CP. et al. 2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure. Heart Rhythm 2023; 20: e17-e91 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2023.03.1538. (PMID: 37283271)
    Google Scholar