Dataset Information

The Prognostic Significance of Right Bundle Branch Block: A Meta-analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The prognostic significance of right bundle branch block (RBBB) is inconsistent across studies. We aimed to assess the association between RBBB (in general population and patients with heart disease) and risk of all-cause mortality, cardiac death, acute myocardial infarction (MI), and heart failure (HF). HYPOTHESIS:RBBB may be associated with increased risk of death. METHODS:PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to February 2015 were searched for prospective cohort studies that reported RBBB at baseline and all-cause mortality, cardiac death, MI, and HF at follow-up. A meta-analysis of published data was undertaken primarily by means of fixed-effects models. RESULTS:Nineteen cohort studies including 201?437 participants were included with a mean follow-up period ranging from 1 to 246 months. For general population with RBBB, the pooled adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality was 1.17 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-1.33) compared with no BBB. General population with RBBB had an increased risk of cardiac death (HR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.17-1.74). For patients with RBBB and acute MI, the pooled risk ratio was 2.31 (95% CI: 2.13-2.49) for in-hospital mortality, 2.85 (95% CI: 2.46-3.30) for 30-day mortality, and 1.96 (95% CI: 1.59-2.42) for longer-term mortality. For acute HF patients, the pooled risk ratio of all-cause mortality was 1.11 (95% CI: 1.06-1.16), and for chronic HF patients it was 1.75 (95% CI: 1.38-2.22). CONCLUSIONS:Right bundle branch block is associated with an increased risk of mortality in general population and patients with heart disease.

SUBMITTER: Xiong Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6490823 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Prognostic Significance of Right Bundle Branch Block: A Meta-analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies.

Xiong Yunyun Y Wang Lian L Liu Wenyan W Hankey Graeme J GJ Xu Biao B Wang Shang S

Clinical cardiology 20151005 10

<h4>Background</h4>The prognostic significance of right bundle branch block (RBBB) is inconsistent across studies. We aimed to assess the association between RBBB (in general population and patients with heart disease) and risk of all-cause mortality, cardiac death, acute myocardial infarction (MI), and heart failure (HF).<h4>Hypothesis</h4>RBBB may be associated with increased risk of death.<h4>Methods</h4>PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to February 2015 were searched for prospectiv ...[more]

PMID: 26436874

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough right ventricular pacing (RVP) is recommended by most of the guidelines for atrioventricular block, it can cause electrical and mechanical desynchrony, impair left ventricular function, and increase the risk of atrial fibrillation. Recently, the His-Purkinje system pacing, including His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch pacing (LBBP), has emerged as a physiological pacing modality. However, few studies have compared their efficacy and safety in atrioventricular block (AVB).Methods and resultsThe PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect databases were searched for observational studies and randomized trials of patients with atrioventricular block requiring permanent pacing, from database inception until 10 January 2022. The primary outcomes were complications and heart failure hospitalization. The secondary outcomes included changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), pacing parameters, procedure duration, and success rate. After extracting the data at baseline and the longest follow-up duration available, a pairwise meta-analysis and a Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis were performed. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) or 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, whereas mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs or 95% CrIs were calculated for continuous outcomes. Seven studies and 1,069 patients were included. Overall, 43.4% underwent LBBP, 33.5% HBP, and 23.1% RVP. Compared with RVP, LBBP and HBP were associated with a shorter paced QRS duration and a more preserved LVEF. HBP significantly increased the pacing threshold and reduced the R-wave amplitude. There was no difference in the risk of complications or the implant success rate. The pacing threshold remained stable during follow-up for the three pacing modalities. The pacing impedance was significantly reduced in HBP, while a numerical but non-significant pacing impedance decrease was observed in both LBBP and RVP. LBBP was associated with an increased R-wave amplitude during follow-up.ConclusionIn this systematic review and network meta-analysis, HBP and LBBP were superior to RVP in paced QRS duration and preservation of LVEF for patients with atrioventricular block. LBBP was associated with a lower pacing threshold and a greater R-wave amplitude than HBP. However, the stability of the pacing output of LBBP may be a concern. Further investigation of the long-term efficacy in left ventricular function and the risk of heart failure hospitalization is needed.Systematic review registration[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=315046], identifier [CRD42022315046].

Project description:A significant number of right bundle branch block (RBBB) patients receive cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), despite lack of evidence for benefit in this patient group. His bundle (HBP) and left bundle pacing (LBP) are novel CRT delivery methods, but their effect on RBBB remains understudied. We aim to compare pacing-induced electrical synchrony during conventional CRT, HBP, and LBP in RBBB patients with different conduction disturbances, and to investigate whether alternative ways of delivering LBP improve response to pacing. We simulated ventricular activation on twenty-four four-chamber heart geometries each including a His-Purkinje system with proximal right bundle branch block (RBBB). We simulated RBBB combined with left anterior and posterior fascicular blocks (LAFB and LPFB). Additionally, RBBB was simulated in the presence of slow conduction velocity (CV) in the myocardium, left ventricular (LV) or right ventricular (RV) His-Purkinje system, and whole His-Purkinje system. Electrical synchrony was measured by the shortest interval to activate 90% of the ventricles (BIVAT-90). Compared to baseline, HBP significantly improved activation times for RBBB alone (BIVAT-90: 66.9 ± 5.5 ms vs. 42.6 ± 3.8 ms, p < 0.01), with LAFB (69.5 ± 5.0 ms vs. 58.1 ± 6.2 ms, p < 0.01), with LPFB (81.8 ± 6.6 ms vs. 62.9 ± 6.2 ms, p < 0.01), with slow myocardial CV (119.4 ± 11.4 ms vs. 97.2 ± 10.0 ms, p < 0.01) or slow CV in the whole His-Purkinje system (102.3 ± 7.0 ms vs. 75.5 ± 5.2 ms, p < 0.01). LBP was only effective in RBBB cases if combined with anodal capture of the RV septum myocardium (BIVAT-90: 66.9 ± 5.5 ms vs. 48.2 ± 5.2 ms, p < 0.01). CRT significantly reduced activation times in RBBB in the presence of severely slow RV His-Purkinje CV (95.1 ± 7.9 ms vs. 84.3 ± 9.3 ms, p < 0.01) and LPFB (81.8 ± 6.6 ms vs. CRT: 72.9 ± 8.6 ms, p < 0.01). Both CRT and HBP were ineffective with severely slow CV in the LV His-Purkinje system. HBP is effective in RBBB patients with otherwise healthy myocardium and Purkinje system, while CRT and LBP are ineffective. Response to LBP improves when LBP is combined with RV septum anodal capture. CRT is better than HBP only in patients with severely slow CV in the RV His-Purkinje system, while CV slowing of the whole His-Purkinje system and the myocardium favor HBP over CRT.

Dataset Information

The Prognostic Significance of Right Bundle Branch Block: A Meta-analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies.

Publications

The Prognostic Significance of Right Bundle Branch Block: A Meta-analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets