A comparative analysis of conduction system pacing and biventricular pacing in patients undergoing atrioventricular node ablation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Abstract Background Atrioventricular node ablation (AVNA) with concomitant permanent pacemaker implantation is a well-established management strategy for patients with atrial fibrillation demonstrating refractory and uncontrolled ventricular rates. Conduction system pacing (CSP) utilising His bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), has emerged as an alternative to conventional pacing (CP) (including right ventricular pacing (RVP) and biventricular pacing (BVP). The aims and objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to provide a comprehensive summary and synthesis of clinical outcomes in the literature for CSP in comparison to BVP when facilitated with AVNA. Methods This study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO registry and the review was conducted as per the PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies from inception till January 11th, 2024. Results were synthesised using a random effects meta-analysis. Risk of bias (ROB) assessment was carried out with the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tool. Results From a total of 259 references identified, 122 full texts were assessed and 5 studies (1 randomised control trial, 2 prospective observational studies, and 2 retrospective observational studies) were included in the review. A total of 738 patients (HBP-294 and LBBAP-444) received CSP and BVP implantation with AVNA, respectively. All devices were implanted successfully with a cumulative total of 4 patients in the HBP population demonstrating acute threshold hold increase following AVN. There was no loss of capture on follow-up in either treatment groups. HBP resulted in a narrower QRSd with a reduction of -35.3 ms (95% confidence interval [CI] -63.8 to -6.78; P<0.05; I2=96.6%) vs BVP. For left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), a weighted mean increase of 3.50% (95% CI -0.55%-7.54%; P=0.02, I2=65.8%) was observed following HBP implantation in comparison to BVP (Figure 1). Furthermore, LBBAP also demonstrated a weighted mean increase in LVEF of 6.02% (95%CI -4.05%-16.1%; P<0.05; I2=90.7%) in comparison to BVP. The mean NYHA score was reduced by -0.54 (95% CI -1.07 to -0.02; P=0.05, I2=65.5%) after HBP implantation when compared to BVP. There was a cumulative total of 45 and 65 events of heart failure associated hospitalisation in the HBP and BVP, respectively (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.19-1.18; P=0.99, I2 =0.00). Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the first methodologically robust systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the outcomes of CSP with AVNA. Overall, both CSP modalities demonstrated feasibility and application as an effective CRT alternative to facilitate AVNA along with a narrower QRSd ,improved LVEF and trend of better clinical outcomes. While these preliminary findings are promising, further RCTs will be necessary to establish the long-term efficacy and safety of this approach.