Cardiac resynchronization therapy in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy: a comparative non-randomized study of His Bundle
Pablo Moriña-Vázquez1, María Teresa Moraleda-Salas2, Adrián Rodríguez-Albarrán3
1Arrhythmia Unit, Department of Cardiology, Hospital Juan Ramon Jimenez (HJRJ)), Ronda Exterior Norte s/n. 21005, Huelva, Spain.
Insights
Permanent His bundle pacing cardiac resynchronization therapy (pHBP-CRT) significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) more than classic biventricular pacing CRT. Pacing thresholds were similar between the two CRT methods.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Electrophysiology
- Medical Devices
Background:
- Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is crucial for heart failure management.
- Permanent His bundle pacing (pHBP) is an emerging CRT technique.
- Limited comparative data exists between pHBP-CRT and classic biventricular pacing (BVP).
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy of pHBP-CRT versus classic CRT in improving left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).
- To evaluate pacing thresholds and QRS duration in both CRT modalities.
Main Methods:
- Single-center study comparing prospective pHBP-CRT (52 patients) with historical classic CRT (51 patients).
- Included patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, LVEF < 35%, and left bundle branch block (LBBB).
Main Results:
- pHBP-CRT demonstrated superior LVEF improvement compared to classic CRT (median 55% vs. 40% at follow-up, p=0.001).
- Pacing thresholds were similar between pHBP-CRT and classic CRT (p=0.48).
- Median paced QRS duration was comparable between groups (135 ms vs. 140 ms, p=0.586).
Conclusions:
- pHBP-CRT offers superior LVEF improvement over classic CRT.
- Both pacing techniques show similar long-term thresholds and QRS narrowing.
- pHBP-CRT is a promising alternative for CRT.
Background:
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) via permanent His bundle pacing (pHBP) has gained acceptance globally, but robust studies comparing pHBP-CRT with classic CRT are lacking. In this study, we aimed to compare the improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) after pHBP-CRT versus classic CRT.
Methods:
This was a single-center study comparing a prospective series of pHBP-CRT with a historical series of CRT via classic biventricular pacing (BVP). Patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, baseline LVEF < 35%, left bundle branch block (LBBB), and CRT indications were selected.
Results:
Fifty-one patients underwent classic CRT and 52 patients underwent pHBP-CRT. In the classic CRT group, the median (interquartile range) basal LVEF was 30% (IQR, 29-35%) before implantation and 40% (35-48%) at follow-up. In the pHBP-CRT group, the median basal LVEF was 30% (28-34%) before implantation and 55% (45-60%) at follow-up, with significant differences between both modalities at follow-up (p = 0.001). The median long term His recruitment threshold with LBBB correction was 1.25 (1-2.5) V at 0.4 ms in cases of pHBP-CRT, compared to a left ventricular coronary sinus threshold of 1.25 (1-1.75) V in cases of classic CRT (p = 0.48). After CRT, the median paced QRS was 135 (120-145) ms for pHBP-CRT versus 140 (130-150) ms for BVP-CRT (p = 0.586).
Conclusions:
The improvement in LVEF was superior with pHBP-CRT than with classic CRT. The thresholds at follow-up were similar in both groups.
Related Concept Videos
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care
Electrophysiology of Normal Cardiac Rhythm
Heart Failure Drugs: Inotropic Agents
Cardiomyopathy IV: Restrictive Cardiomyopathy
Dysrhythmias VI: Management of Dysrhythmias


