scholarly journals His Bundle Pacing: Short Review of Literature and Technical Aspects

Author(s):  
Mukherjee S

History of pacing has evolved from the primitive state of temporary transvenous pacing by large fixed machine to leadless modern technology. The pacing site has also been changed from traditional right ventricular apex to various other sites. The concept behind such experient was due to several complications in the long term from traditional Right Ventricular Apical Pacing (RVAP). The His Bundle pacing results in conduction and contraction similar to and and more often called physiological pacing. This mini review describes short history of evolution of concept of His Bundle pacing and its technical aspects of successful implantation.

Heart Rhythm ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 1554-1561 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pugazhendhi Vijayaraman ◽  
Bengt Herweg ◽  
Gopi Dandamudi ◽  
Suneet Mittal ◽  
Advay G. Bhatt ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (22) ◽  
Author(s):  
Venkatesh Ravi ◽  
Dominik Beer ◽  
Grzegorz M. Pietrasik ◽  
Jillian L. Hanifin ◽  
Sara Ooms ◽  
...  

Background Conventional right ventricular pacing (RVP) has been associated with an increased incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF). We sought to compare the occurrence of new‐onset AF and assessed AF disease progression during long‐term follow‐up between His bundle pacing (HBP) and RVP. Methods and Results We included patients undergoing initial dual‐chamber pacemaker implants at Rush University Medical Center between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2019. A total of 360 patients were evaluated, and 225 patients (HBP, n=105; RVP, n=120) were included in the study. Among the 148 patients (HBP, n=72; RVP, n=76) with no history of AF, HBP demonstrated a lower risk of new‐onset AF (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.28–0.99; P =0.046) compared with traditional RVP. This benefit was observed with His or RVP burden exceeding 20% (HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13–0.64; P =0.002), ≥40% (HR, 0.31; P =0.007), ≥60% (HR, 0.35; P =0.015), and ≥80% (HR, 0.40; P =0.038). There was no difference with His or RV pacing burden <20% (HR, 0.613; 95% CI, 0.213–1.864; P =0.404). In patients with a prior history of AF, there was no difference in AF progression ( P =0.715); however, in a subgroup of patients with a pacing burden ≥40%, HBP demonstrated a trend toward a lower risk of AF progression (HR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.03–1.16; P =0.072). Conclusions HBP demonstrated a lower risk of new‐onset AF compared with RVP, which was primarily observed at a higher pacing burden.


2006 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 81-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Domenico Catanzariti ◽  
Massimiliano Maines ◽  
Claudio Cemin ◽  
Gianpaolo Broso ◽  
Tiziana Marotta ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (7) ◽  
pp. 1131-1139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seung-Ah Lee ◽  
Myung-Jin Cha ◽  
Youngjin Cho ◽  
Il-Young Oh ◽  
Eue-Keun Choi ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document