-
Turk Kardiyoloji Dernegi Arsivi : Turk... Jun 2023Left bundle branch block-induced cardiomyopathy is an increasingly recognized type of dilated cardiomyopathy identified in a minority but not negligible proportion of... (Review)
Review
Left bundle branch block-induced cardiomyopathy is an increasingly recognized type of dilated cardiomyopathy identified in a minority but not negligible proportion of patients with newly diagnosed heart failure. However, it has not yet been included among the possible etiologies of dilated cardiomyopathies or among the unclassified cardiomyopathies. Although a few sets of diagnostic criteria have been proposed, currently there is a lack of universal consensus regarding diagnostic criteria. Some specific clinical features and electrocardiography, echocardiography, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging findings are recommended to help physicians in the diagnosis of left bundle branch block-induced cardiomyopathy. In this review, prevalence, pathophysiological mechanisms, diagnostic criteria, diagnostic modalities, and specific features of left bundle branch block-induced cardiomyopathy have been addressed with attention to the differential diagnosis of other dilated cardiomyopathies.
Topics: Humans; Bundle-Branch Block; Cardiomyopathy, Dilated; Cardiomyopathies; Electrocardiography; Echocardiography; Arrhythmias, Cardiac
PubMed: 37272151
DOI: 10.5543/tkda.2023.06737 -
Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology Review 2023
PubMed: 37860698
DOI: 10.15420/aer.2023.14 -
European Heart Journal Oct 2023De novo implanted cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) reduces the risk of morbidity and mortality in patients with left bundle branch block,...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
De novo implanted cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) reduces the risk of morbidity and mortality in patients with left bundle branch block, heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, among HFrEF patients with right ventricular pacing (RVP), the efficacy of CRT-D upgrade is uncertain.
METHODS
In this multicentre, randomized, controlled trial, 360 symptomatic (New York Heart Association Classes II-IVa) HFrEF patients with a pacemaker or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), high RVP burden ≥ 20%, and a wide paced QRS complex duration ≥ 150 ms were randomly assigned to receive CRT-D upgrade (n = 215) or ICD (n = 145) in a 3:2 ratio. The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, or <15% reduction of left ventricular end-systolic volume assessed at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization.
RESULTS
Over a median follow-up of 12.4 months, the primary outcome occurred in 58/179 (32.4%) in the CRT-D arm vs. 101/128 (78.9%) in the ICD arm (odds ratio 0.11; 95% confidence interval 0.06-0.19; P < .001). All-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization occurred in 22/215 (10%) in the CRT-D arm vs. 46/145 (32%) in the ICD arm (hazard ratio 0.27; 95% confidence interval 0.16-0.47; P < .001). The incidence of procedure- or device-related complications was similar between the two arms [CRT-D group 25/211 (12.3%) vs. ICD group 11/142 (7.8%)].
CONCLUSIONS
In pacemaker or ICD patients with significant RVP burden and reduced ejection fraction, upgrade to CRT-D compared with ICD therapy reduced the combined risk of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, or absence of reverse remodelling.
PubMed: 37632437
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad591