» Articles » PMID: 21376930

Defining Left Bundle Branch Block in the Era of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Overview
Journal Am J Cardiol
Date 2011 Mar 8
PMID 21376930
Citations 207
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has emerged as an attractive intervention to improve left ventricular mechanical function by changing the sequence of electrical activation. Unfortunately, many patients receiving CRT do not benefit but are subjected to device complications and costs. Thus, there is a need for better selection criteria. Current criteria for CRT eligibility include a QRS duration ≥ 120 ms. However, QRS morphology is not considered, although it can indicate the cause of delayed conduction. Recent studies have suggested that only patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) benefit from CRT, and not patients with right bundle branch block or nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay. The authors review the pathophysiologic and clinical evidence supporting why only patients with complete LBBB benefit from CRT. Furthermore, they review how the threshold of 120 ms to define LBBB was derived subjectively at a time when criteria for LBBB and right bundle branch block were mistakenly reversed. Three key studies over the past 65 years have suggested that 1/3 of patients diagnosed with LBBB by conventional electrocardiographic criteria may not have true complete LBBB, but likely have a combination of left ventricular hypertrophy and left anterior fascicular block. On the basis of additional insights from computer simulations, the investigators propose stricter criteria for complete LBBB that include a QRS duration ≥ 140 ms for men and ≥ 130 ms for women, along with mid-QRS notching or slurring in ≥ 2 contiguous leads. Further studies are needed to reinvestigate the electrocardiographic criteria for complete LBBB and the implications of these criteria for selecting patients for CRT.

Citing Articles

Impact of SGLT2 inhibitor on clinical and echocardiographic outcomes in patients with CRT during long-term period.

Atabekov T, Krivolapov S, Silivanova I, Khlynin M, Kisteneva I, Batalov R J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2025; .

PMID: 39930305 DOI: 10.1007/s10840-025-02014-x.


Cardiac resynchronization therapy via left bundle branch pacing in heart failure with complete left bundle branch block: is the defibrillator needed?.

Yang D, Ma Q, Zhu H, Wang L, Xiang M, Wang J Front Cardiovasc Med. 2025; 12:1518349.

PMID: 39882012 PMC: 11772345. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2025.1518349.


Quest for the ideal assessment of electrical ventricular dyssynchrony in cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Nguyen U, Vernooy K, Prinzen F J Mol Cell Cardiol Plus. 2025; 7():100061.

PMID: 39802441 PMC: 11708375. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmccpl.2024.100061.


Identifying non-responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy in the non-left bundle branch block.

Nakamura T, Ishibashi K, Useda N, Oka S, Miyazaki Y, Wakamiya A J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2025; .

PMID: 39752041 DOI: 10.1007/s10840-024-01972-y.


A long-term clinical comparative study of left bundle branch pacing versus biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure and complete left bundle branch block.

Zhuo J, Chen C, Lin J, Wang J, Fu F Heart Vessels. 2025; .

PMID: 39751868 DOI: 10.1007/s00380-024-02512-4.