A randomized comparison of HBP versus RVP: Effect on left ventricular function and biomarkers of collagen metabolism
Abstract
Background: Right ventricular pacing (RVP) can result in pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM). It is unknown whether specific biomarkers reflect differences between His bundle pacing (HBP) and RVP and predict a decrease in left ventricular function during RVP.
Aims: We aimed to compare the effect of HBP and RVP on the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and to study how they affect serum markers of collagen metabolism.
Methods: Ninety-two high-risk PICM patients were randomized to HBP or RVP groups. Their clinical characteristics, echocardiography, and serum levels of transforming growth factor β1 (TGF-β1), matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP-9), suppression of tumorigenicity 2 interleukin (ST2-IL), tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 1 (TIMP-1), and galectin 3 (Gal-3) were studied before pacemaker implantation and six months later.
Results: Fifty-three patients were randomized to the HBP group and 39 patients to the RVP group. HBP failed in 10 patients, who crossed over to the RVP group. Patients with RVP had significantly lower LVEF compared to HBP patients after six months of pacing (−5% and −4% in as-treated and intention-to-treat analysis, respectively). Levels of TGF-β1 after 6 months were lower in HBP than RVP patients (mean difference −6 ng/ml; P = 0.009) and preimplant Gal-3 and ST2-IL levels were higher in RVP patients, with a decline in LVEF ≥5% compared to those with a decline of <5% (mean difference 3 ng/ml and 8 ng/ml; P = 0.02 for both groups).
Conclusion: In high-risk PICM patients, HBP was superior to RVP in providing more physiological ventricular function, as reflected by higher LVEF and lower levels of TGF-β1. In RVP patients, LVEF declined more in those with higher baseline Gal-3 and ST2-IL levels than in those with lower levels.
Keywords: His bundle pacingmarkers of collagen metabolismright ventricular pacing
References
- Khurshid S, Epstein AE, Verdino RJ, et al. Incidence and predictors of right ventricular pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. Heart Rhythm. 2014; 11(9): 1619–1625.
- Curila K, Jurak P, Halamek J, et al. Ventricular activation pattern assessment during right ventricular pacing: Ultra-high-frequency ECG study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021; 32(5): 1385–1394.
- Abdelrahman M, Subzposh FA, Beer D, et al. Clinical outcomes of his bundle pacing compared to right ventricular pacing. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 71(20): 2319–2330.
- Vijayaraman P, Herweg B, Dandamudi G, et al. Outcomes of His-bundle pacing upgrade after long-term right ventricular pacing and/or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy: Insights into disease progression. Heart Rhythm. 2019; 16(10): 1554–1561.
- Dreger H, Maethner K, Bondke H, et al. Pacing-induced cardiomyopathy in patients with right ventricular stimulation for >15 years. Europace. 2012; 14(2): 238–242.
- Fang F, Zhang Q, Chan JYS, et al. Early pacing-induced systolic dyssynchrony is a strong predictor of left ventricular adverse remodeling: analysis from the Pacing to Avoid Cardiac Enlargement (PACE) trial. Int J Cardiol. 2013; 168(2): 723–728.
- Ahmed FZ, Khattar RS, Zaidi AM, et al. Pacing-induced cardiomyopathy: pathophysiological insights through matrix metalloproteinases. Heart Fail Rev. 2014; 19(5): 669–680.
- Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, et al. Fitting linear mixed-effects models usinglme4. Journal of Statistical Software. 2015; 67(1).
- 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(8): e382–e482.
- Kronborg MB, Mortensen PT, Poulsen SH, et al. His and para-His pacing in AV block: feasibility and electrocardiographic findings. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2011; 31(3): 255–262.
- Chan JYS, Fang F, Zhang Q, et al. Biventricular pacing is superior to right ventricular pacing in bradycardia patients with preserved systolic function: 2-year results of the PACE trial. Eur Heart J. 2011; 32(20): 2533–2540.
- Morishita T, Uzui H, Mitsuke Y, et al. Association between matrix metalloproteinase-9 and worsening heart failure events in patients with chronic heart failure. ESC Heart Fail. 2017; 4(3): 321–330.
- Dobaczewski M, Chen W, Frangogiannis NG. Transforming growth factor (TGF)-β signaling in cardiac remodeling. J Mol Cell Cardiol. 2011; 51(4): 600–606.
- Imran TF, Shin HJ, Mathenge N, et al. Meta-Analysis of the Usefulness of Plasma Galectin-3 to Predict the Risk of Mortality in Patients With Heart Failure and in the General Population. Am J Cardiol. 2017; 119(1): 57–64.
- Aimo A, Vergaro G, Passino C, et al. Prognostic Value of Soluble Suppression of Tumorigenicity-2 in Chronic Heart Failure: A Meta-Analysis. JACC Heart Fail. 2017; 5(4): 280–286.
- Brooks WW, Conrad CH. Myocardial fibrosis in transforming growth factor beta(1)heterozygous mice. J Mol Cell Cardiol. 2000; 32(2): 187–195.
- Pastore G, Aggio S, Baracca E, et al. Hisian area and right ventricular apical pacing differently affect left atrial function: an intra-patients evaluation. Europace. 2014; 16(7): 1033–1039.
- Fang F, Zhang Q, Chan JYS, et al. Deleterious effect of right ventricular apical pacing on left ventricular diastolic function and the impact of pre-existing diastolic disease. Eur Heart J. 2011; 32(15): 1891–1899.
- Sharma PS, Patel NR, Ravi V, et al. Clinical outcomes of left bundle branch area pacing compared to right ventricular pacing: Results from the Geisinger-Rush Conduction System Pacing Registry. Heart Rhythm. 2022; 19(1): 3–11.
- Andre C, Piver E, Perault R, et al. Galectin-3 predicts response and outcomes after cardiac resynchronization therapy. J Transl Med. 2018; 16(1): 299.
