People with heart failure and a mildly reduced pumping function often face frequent hospital visits. A large review looked at a new way to pace the heart called conduction system pacing. This method includes His-bundle pacing and left bundle branch pacing. Researchers compared it to the older standard method called biventricular pacing. They found that the new method led to fewer hospital stays for heart failure. It also improved the combined risk of death or hospitalization. The new method helped narrow electrical signals in the heart better than the old way. This suggests the heart is working more smoothly with the new technique. Safety data showed fewer device-related problems with the new method. However, the review noted that large randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings. Until then, the results offer hope but require more proof before changing standard care.
Meta-analysis finds conduction system pacing reduces heart failure hospitalizations in HFmrEFNew pacing method cuts hospital stays for heart failure patients with mildly reduced function
AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work
This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the comparative efficacy of conduction system pacing (CSP), including His-bundle pacing and left bundle branch pacing, versus biventricular pacing (BiVP) in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF, left ventricular ejection fraction 41%-49%). The analysis included 1867 patients from available studies.
Key findings showed that CSP was associated with a significant reduction in heart failure hospitalization (HFH) (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.49-0.82) and an improved composite outcome of death or HFH (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.43-0.94) compared with BiVP. All-cause mortality was similar between groups (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.63-1.07). CSP also resulted in greater QRS narrowing (mean difference -14 ms). Device-related complications were numerically lower with CSP.
The authors note that these findings are based on observational and non-randomized data, and large randomized trials are warranted to confirm the results. The meta-analysis did not report on serious adverse events, discontinuations, or tolerability.
For clinicians, CSP, particularly left bundle branch pacing, appears superior to BiVP in reducing heart failure hospitalizations and enhancing electrical resynchronization in HFmrEF, but these findings require confirmation from large randomized trials before routine adoption.