Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 19, 2025

Post-Myocardial Infarction Heart Failure in Closed-chest Coronary Occlusion/Reperfusion Model in Göttingen Minipigs and Landrace Pigs
Published on: April 17, 2021
Mid-Term Cardiac Outcomes in Prosthetic Valve Surgery and HF Patients Across EF After CSP
Peng Li1, Xiao-Xiao Jiang1, Yi-Heng Yang1
1Department of Cardiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China.
Insights
Conduction system pacing (CSP) is a safe and feasible option for patients with prosthetic valve surgery and heart failure. This pacing method promotes reverse cardiac remodeling and reduces the risk of pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy, with over 25% of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients achieving normalization.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Cardiac Electrophysiology
- Heart Failure Management
Background:
- Clinical outcomes of conduction system pacing (CSP) in patients with prosthetic valve surgery (PVS) and heart failure (HF) are not well-established.
- This population presents unique challenges for pacing due to prior cardiac surgery and underlying heart conditions.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and clinical impact of CSP in patients with PVS and HF.
- To assess the effects of CSP on cardiac structure and function across different left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) categories.
Main Methods:
- A consecutive series of patients with atrioventricular block post-PVS and HF history undergoing CSP were enrolled.
- Outcomes were analyzed based on LVEF: reduced (HFrEF), mildly reduced (HFmrEF), and preserved (HFpEF).
- Key assessments included LVEF, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), left atrial diameter, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class.
Main Results:
- CSP was successful in 93.75% of patients.
- All LVEF cohorts showed improved LVEDD.
- The HFrEF group demonstrated significant improvements in LVEF, left atrial diameter, and NYHA class.
- No deterioration was observed in HFmrEF/HFpEF groups.
- Absence of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) was an independent predictor for complete LVEF/LVEDD normalization in 26.47% of HFrEF patients.
- No major complications like cardiac perforation, thrombosis, or pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) occurred during a mean follow-up of 25.49 months.
Conclusions:
- CSP is a feasible and safe pacing strategy for PVS patients with HF.
- CSP facilitates cardiac reverse remodeling and mitigates PICM risk across all LVEF categories.
- Non-RHD etiology predicts complete normalization of cardiac function in a significant subset of HFrEF patients.
Objective:
Clinical outcomes of conduction system pacing (CSP) in patients with prosthetic valve surgery (PVS) and heart failure (HF) remain unclear. This study evaluated the feasibility, safety, and clinical impact of CSP in this population.
Methods:
Consecutive patients with atrioventricular block post-PVS and HF history undergoing CSP from January 2018 to December 2022 were enrolled. Exclusions included prior pacemaker implantation, biventricular pacing, or ventricular pacing <40%. Outcomes were assessed by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) categories: reduced (HFrEF, LVEF ≤40%), mildly reduced (HFmrEF, 41%-49%), and preserved (HFpEF, ≥50%).
Results:
CSP succeeded in 90/96 patients (93.75%): 34 HFrEF (37.78%), 11 HFmrEF (12.22%), and 45 HFpEF (50.00%). All cohorts showed improved left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) (HFrEF: 56.35 ± 10.01 vs. 60.76 ± 8.36 mm, p < 0.001; HFmrEF: 52.54 ± 5.01 vs. 56.73 ± 4.10 mm, p = 0.017; HFpEF: 48.07 ± 4.22 vs. 48.80 ± 3.99 mm, p = 0.035). The HFrEF cohort demonstrated significant improvements in LVEF (44.15 ± 12.23% vs. 31.26 ± 5.98%, p < 0.001), left atrial diameter (50.12 ± 13.91 vs. 54.00 ± 17.14 mm, p = 0.006), and New York Heart Association class (2.63 ± 0.85 vs. 3.13 ± 0.78, p = 0.002). No deterioration occurred in HFmrEF/HFpEF. Complete LVEF/LVEDD normalization was achieved in 26.47% of HFrEF patients (9/34), with absence of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) as an independent predictor (HR = 8.851, 95% CI 1.336-58.646, p = 0.024). Over 25.49 ± 9.4 months, no cardiac perforation, thrombosis, pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM), or infections occurred.
Conclusions:
CSP is feasible and safe, promoting cardiac reverse remodeling and mitigating PICM risk in PVS patients with HF across LVEF categories. Over 25% of HFrEF patients achieved complete normalization, predicted by non-RHD etiology.
More Related Videos
12:45Benefits of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in an Asynchronous Heart Failure Model Induced by Left Bundle Branch Ablation and Rapid Pacing
Published on: December 11, 2017
07:24Reduction in Left Ventricular Wall Stress and Improvement in Function in Failing Hearts using Algisyl-LVR
Published on: April 8, 2013
Related Concept Videos
Heart Failure Drugs: Inhibitors of Renin-Angiotensin System
Heart Failure II: Pathophysiology
Heart Failure Drugs: β-Blockers
Heart Failure V: Medical Management
Heart Failure VI: Adjunct Therapies
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy