» Articles » PMID: 39440428

Multicenter Hemodynamic Assessment of the LOT-CRT Strategy: When Does Combining Left Bundle Branch Pacing and Coronary Venous Pacing Enhance Resynchronization?: Primary Results of the CSPOT Study

Abstract

Background: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) may be an alternative to biventricular pacing (BVP) for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We sought to compare the acute hemodynamic and ECG effects of LBBAP, BVP, and left bundle-optimized therapy CRT (LOT-CRT) in CRT candidates with advanced conduction disease.

Methods: In this multicenter study, 48 patients with either nonspecific interventricular conduction delay (n=29) or left bundle branch block (n=19) underwent acute hemodynamic testing to determine the change in left ventricular pressure maximal first derivative (LV d/d) from baseline atrial pacing to BVP, LBBAP, or LOT-CRT.

Results: Atrioventricular-optimized increases in LV d/d for LOT-CRT (mean, 25.8% [95% CI, 20.9%-30.7%]) and BVP (26.4% [95% CI, 20.2%-32.6%]) were greater than unipolar LBBAP (19.3% [95% CI, 15.0%-23.7%]) or bipolar LBBAP (16.4% [95% CI, 12.7%-20.0%]; ≤0.005). QRS shortening was greater in LOT-CRT (29.5 [95% CI, 23.4-35.6] ms) than unipolar LBBAP (11.9 [95% CI, 6.1-17.7] ms), bipolar LBBAP (11.7 ms [95% CI, 6.4-17.0]), or BVP (18.5 [95% CI, 11.0-25.9] ms), all ≤0.005. Compared with patients with left bundle branch block, patients with interventricular conduction delay experienced less QRS reduction (=0.026) but similar improvements in LV d/d (=0.29). Bipolar LBBAP caused anodal capture in 54% of patients and resulted in less LV d/d improvement than unipolar LBBAP (18.6% versus 23.7%; <0.001). Subclassification of LBBAP capture (European Heart Rhythm Association criteria) indicated LBBAP or LV septal pacing in 27 patients (56%) and deep septal pacing in 21 patients (44%). The hemodynamic benefit of adding left ventricular coronary vein pacing to LBBAP depended on baseline QRS duration (=0.031) and success of LBBAP (<0.004): LOT-CRT provided 14.5% (5.0%-24.1%) greater LV d/d improvement and 20.8 (12.8-28.8) ms greater QRS shortening than LBBAP in subjects with QRS ≥171 ms and deep septal pacing capture type.

Conclusions: In a CRT cohort with advanced conduction disease, LOT-CRT and BVP provided greater acute hemodynamic benefit than LBBAP. Subjects with wider QRS or deep septal pacing are more likely to benefit from the addition of a left ventricular coronary vein lead to implement LOT-CRT.

Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04905290.

Citing Articles

Conduction System Pacing for CRT: A Physiological Alternative.

Herweg B, Mumtaz M, Vijayaraman P Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev. 2025; 14:e04.

PMID: 40017670 PMC: 11865673. DOI: 10.15420/aer.2024.10.


Multipoint Left Ventricular Pacing as Alternative Approach in Cases of Biventricular Pacing Failure.

Antoniou C, Chrysohoou C, Manolakou P, Tsiachris D, Kordalis A, Tsioufis K J Clin Med. 2025; 14(4).

PMID: 40004595 PMC: 11856938. DOI: 10.3390/jcm14041065.


Current Advance, Challenges and Future Perspectives of Conduction System Pacing.

Wang T, Ma P, Yang Y, Xia Y, Jing Z, She Z Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2025; 25(12):438.

PMID: 39742235 PMC: 11683707. DOI: 10.31083/j.rcm2512438.


Conduction system pacing versus biventricular pacing in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and electrical dyssynchrony.

Ammar A, Elewa A, Emam A, Sharief M, Kamel O Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024; 11:1495689.

PMID: 39703884 PMC: 11655463. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1495689.

References
1.
Zweerink A, Salden O, Van Everdingen W, de Roest G, van de Ven P, Cramer M . Hemodynamic Optimization in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: Should We Aim for dP/dt or Stroke Work?. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2019; 5(9):1013-1025. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacep.2019.05.020. View

2.
Kusumoto F, Schoenfeld M, Barrett C, Edgerton J, Ellenbogen K, Gold M . 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.... Heart Rhythm. 2018; 16(9):e128-e226. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2018.10.037. View

3.
Di Marco A, Faga V, Merce J, Dallaglio P, Rodriguez J, Anguera I . Deep septal pacing to upgrade patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. HeartRhythm Case Rep. 2022; 8(1):9-12. PMC: 8767178. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrcr.2021.10.002. View

4.
Herweg B, Sharma P, Cano O, Ponnusamy S, Zanon F, Jastrzebski M . Arrhythmic Risk in Biventricular Pacing Compared With Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing: Results From the I-CLAS Study. Circulation. 2023; 149(5):379-390. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.067465. View

5.
Liu W, Hu C, Wang Y, Cheng Y, Zhao Y, Liu Y . Mechanical Synchrony and Myocardial Work in Heart Failure Patients With Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing and Comparison With Biventricular Pacing. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021; 8:727611. PMC: 8417592. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.727611. View