Aim: Strict criteria of typical left bundle branch block (LBBB) can help with the prediction for cardiac resynchronization therapy response. The aim of this study is to determine whether the use of strict criteria for both LBBB and right bundle branch block (RBBB) predicts successful QRS correction (≤130 ms) by left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP).Methods: Consecutive patients with pacemaker indications according to the present guideline who also underwent LBBAP implantation were retrospectively assessed. Inclusion criteria were patients with BBB and the baseline QRSd > 130 ms. Baseline characteristics and pacing parameters were compared between typical and atypical BBB groups. Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for covariates that were found in univariate analyses for successful QRS correction by LBBAP.Results: Seventy-three patients were enrolled. Among them, 10 (13.6%) had atypical BBB (5 LBBB and 5 RBBB) and 63 (86.4%) had typical BBB (30 LBBB and 33 RBBB). The rate of successful QRS correction was higher in typical-BBB patients (52/63; 82.5%) than that in atypical-BBB patients (3/10; 30%), P < .001. Paced QRSd was obviously narrower in patients with typical BBB than that in patients with atypical-BBB (118 ± 14 vs 133 ± 14 ms, P = .003). In multivariate logistic regression, only typical BBB morphology and the implantation depth of 3830 pacing electrode in the ventricular septum were independent predictors for successful QRS correction. Conclusion:This study demonstrates that patients with typical-BBB morphology benefit more from LBBAP for QRS correction. Typical BBB morphology together with deep penetration of 3830 ventricular electrode in the interventricular septum predicts the success of QRS correction by LBBAP. K E Y W O R D SLBBB, left bundle area pacing, morphology, QRS correction, RBBB, typical

Background: Different from the traditional right ventricular pacing, the left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is accomplished with deeper lead implantation and more attempts. However, myocardial damage is unclear in LBBAP. Objective: The objective of the study was to observe the change of troponin T and explore possible factors associated with greater myocardial damage in LBBAP. Methods: Patients with an indication for pacemaker implantation underwent attempts for LBBAP by transventricular septal method. Levels of troponin T were determined before operation, 12 h and 1 week after the operation. Parameters of intraoperation and follow-up were recorded and analyzed. Results: In total, successful LBBAP was achieved in 126 patients. The levels of troponin T increased significantly at 12 h after the operation compared with those before operation (96.45 ± 11.07 [69.06] vs. 16.59 ± 1.84 [11.92] ng/L, p < 0.001), while there were no significant differences between pre-and post-operative levels at 1 week. Correlation and regression analysis showed that only the number of attempts was an independent factor related to the change of troponin T. During 1 year of follow-up, LBBAP was safe and feasible with few complications. Conclusions: Myocardial damage of LBBAP was clinically significant. The number of attempts was an independent factor related to the myocardial damage. (REV INVEST CLIN. [AHEAD OF PRINT]

No abstract

No abstract