A systematic review and meta-analysis of upgrade to biventricular or conduction system pacing approaches

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Chronic RV pacing has been recognised as being harmful to cardiac function. Patients undergoing a de novo pacemaker implant with even mild LV impairment are recommended to instead receive a physiological pacing strategy (biventricular or conduction system pacing [CSP]). No corresponding guideline recommendation exists for patients who already have a pacemaker. Methods We undertook a random-effects meta-analysis of all RCTs and observational studies covering device upgrade to biventricular pacing or conduction system pacing. Results 6 RCTs assessing effect of upgrade to BiV pacing randomising 161 patients were eligible for analysis. Eligible observational studies included 46 of BiV upgrade and 7 of CSP upgrade totalling 2795 patients. Mean LVEF improved by +8.3% from 34.4% in BiV upgrade RCTs (p=0.001) and +8.3% from 25.7% in BiV upgrade observational studies (p<0.001). In observational studies of upgrade to CSP, LVEF increased by +10.1% from 38.4% (p=0.001) despite less severe LV impairment at baseline (p=0.004 vs mean EF in BiV RCTs and p<0.0001 vs mean EF in BiV observational studies). LVESV decreased significantly by −25.4 ml, −23.7 ml, and −19.8 ml in BiV RCTs, BiV observational studies and CSP observational studies. Significant changes were also seen in NYHA class (decreased by −0.4, −0.8 and −1.0 respectively). Minnesota Heart Failure Score (−6.9 points) and peak oxygen uptake (+1.1 ml/kg/min) increased significantly in RCTs of BiV upgrade. This was also seen in observational studies of BiV upgrade (−21.0 points and +2.63 ml/kg/min respectively). Conclusions RCTs and observational studies of upgrade to BiV pacing show significant physiological and symptomatic benefit. Observational studies of CSP upgrade show similar benefit with significant improvements in LVEF, LVESV and NYHA class in patients with an even milder degree of baseline LV impairment. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.