Comparison between his-bundle pacing and biventricular pacing as cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has demonstrated significant improvements in cardiovascular outcomes of selected heart failure patients. However, conventional biventricular CRT implantation can be challenging due to unfavorable coronary sinus anatomy, leads to lead instability, poor capture, and insufficient cardiac resynchronization. His-bundle pacing has gained interest as alternative strategy for patients underwent biventricular CRT implantation when coronary sinus lead implantation is unsuccesful or in non-responder cases. Purpose This study aims to compare the efficacy of his-bundle pacing and biventricular pacing in improving electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, and clinical parameters of heart failure patients that required resynchronization therapy. Methods A search for eligible studies was conducted until August 2021 on three databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, ProQuest). Included studies were evaluated for risk of bias. Our primary outcomes of interest were mean difference in QRS duration, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and change in systolic blood pressure (SBP). We also investigated left ventricular activation time, left ventricular dyssynchrony index, left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV), New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, 6-minute walk test, quality of life, heart failure hospitalization and cardiovascular or all cause death. Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4 was utilized to compute mean differences. Results We identified five studies from 2010 to 2019, involving 95 heart failure patients underwent CRT implantation. Pooled analysis showed that his-bundle pacing resulted in significant narrowing of QRS duration compared to biventricular pacing [Mean Difference -23.17 ms (95% CI -36.10, -10.24; p=0.0004; I2=0.63)]. Left ventricular activation time and left ventricular dyssynchrony index were significantly improved in his bundle pacing. There were no significant differences of changes in LVEF, LVESV, and SBP. Clinical parameters such as NYHA functional class, 6-minute walk test, and quality of life were significantly improved in both pacing modality. No significant difference in heart failure hospitalization and cardiovascular or all cause mortality. Conclusion His-bundle pacing delivers better decrease of QRS duration, also reduction in left ventricular activation time and left ventricular dyssynchrony index compared to biventricular pacing. These suggests that his-bundle pacing is a reasonable alternative option for cardiac resynchronization therapy.