Login
Search
Search
0 Dates
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
0 Events
CPC 2018
CPC 2019
Curso de Atualização em Medicina Cardiovascular 2019
Reunião Anual Conjunta dos Grupos de Estudo de Cirurgia Cardíaca, Doenças Valvulares e Ecocardiografia da SPC
CPC 2020
CPC 2021
CPC 2022
CPC 2023
CPC 2024
CPC 2025
CPC 2026
0 Topics
A. Basics
B. Imaging
C. Arrhythmias and Device Therapy
D. Heart Failure
E. Coronary Artery Disease, Acute Coronary Syndromes, Acute Cardiac Care
F. Valvular, Myocardial, Pericardial, Pulmonary, Congenital Heart Disease
G. Aortic Disease, Peripheral Vascular Disease, Stroke
H. Interventional Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery
I. Hypertension
J. Preventive Cardiology
K. Cardiovascular Disease In Special Populations
L. Cardiovascular Pharmacology
M. Cardiovascular Nursing
N. E-Cardiology / Digital Health, Public Health, Health Economics, Research Methodology
O. Basic Science
P. Other
0 Themes
01. History of Cardiology
02. Clinical Skills
03. Imaging
04. Arrhythmias, General
05. Atrial Fibrillation
06. Supraventricular Tachycardia (non-AF)
07. Syncope and Bradycardia
08. Ventricular Arrhythmias and Sudden Cardiac Death (SCD)
09. Device Therapy
10. Chronic Heart Failure
11. Acute Heart Failure
12. Coronary Artery Disease (Chronic)
13. Acute Coronary Syndromes
14. Acute Cardiac Care
15. Valvular Heart Disease
16. Infective Endocarditis
17. Myocardial Disease
18. Pericardial Disease
19. Tumors of the Heart
20. Congenital Heart Disease and Pediatric Cardiology
21. Pulmonary Circulation, Pulmonary Embolism, Right Heart Failure
22. Aortic Disease
23. Peripheral Vascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
24. Stroke
25. Interventional Cardiology
26. Cardiovascular Surgery
27. Hypertension
28. Risk Factors and Prevention
29. Rehabilitation and Sports Cardiology
30. Cardiovascular Disease in Special Populations
31. Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy
32. Cardiovascular Nursing
33. e-Cardiology / Digital Health
34. Public Health and Health Economics
35. Research Methodology
36. Basic Science
37. Miscellanea
0 Resources
Abstract
Slides
Vídeo
Report
CLEAR FILTERS
Does LBBAP capture type influence clinical outcomes?
Session:
Sessão de Posters 01 - Estimulação do sistema de condução: LBBAP na prática
Speaker:
Ana L. Silva
Congress:
CPC 2026
Topic:
C. Arrhythmias and Device Therapy
Theme:
09. Device Therapy
Subtheme:
09.1 Antibradycardia Pacing
Session Type:
Posters Eletrónicos
FP Number:
---
Authors:
Ana L. Silva; Ana Luísa Rocha; Maria João Primo; Mariana Rodrigues Simões; Tatiana Pereira dos Santos; Inês Cruz; Didier Martinez; Patrícia Alves; Carolina Saleiro; João André Ferreira; Natália António; Lino Gonçalves
Abstract
<p style="text-align:justify"><strong>Background: </strong>Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) enables physiological ventricular activation, but whether different capture types translate into distinct clinical outcomes remains uncertain.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare outcomes according to LBBAP capture type (confirmed, probable, left-septal, and deep-septal).</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-center, retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent LBBAP implantation between September 2022 and July 2024. Confirmed LBB capture was defined by QRS transition with output reduction (from non-selective to left ventricular septal pacing or to selective LBB capture), paced V6 RWPT<75 ms (<80 ms in LBBB), V6–V1 interpeak interval >44 ms, or selective capture on programmed stimulation. The primary outcome includes a composite of heart failure(HF)-related emergency department (ED) admissions or HF hospitalization.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 294 patients were included: 222 (75.6%) had confirmed, 36 (12.2%) probable, 20 (6.8%) left-septal, and 16 (5.4%) deep-septal capture. Mean age was 74.5±9.7 years, 68.4% were male, and median follow-up was 19.5 months. The most frequent indication was third-degree atrioventricular (AV) block (35.7%), followed by second-degree AV block (19.4%) and HF with reduced ejection fraction (14.6%).<br /> Paced QRS duration was significantly shorter with confirmed LBB capture (115.7±13.8ms) compared with left-septal (126.5±17.5ms; p=0.016) and deep-septal capture (139.6±15.7ms; p < 0.001), with no difference versus probable capture (121.1±14.3ms; p=0.224). Paced left ventricular activation time (LVAT) was also significantly shorter in the confirmed group (74ms, IQR 12) compared with probable (85ms, IQR 12), left-septal (96ms, IQR 8), and deep-septal capture (92ms, IQR 12; p<0.001).<br /> Baseline LVEF was 49.6±12.7%, slightly lower in the left-septal group (42.1±12.7%; p=0.035). Post-pacing LVEF (53.1±11.2%) and LVEF improvement (4.7±9.4%) were not significantly different across capture types (p=0.417 and p=0.802, respectively).<br /> In the multivariable Cox model adjusted for age, sex, and pacing percentage, and using confirmed LBB capture as the reference, no significant differences in clinical events were observed for probable (HR 1.326, 95% CI 0.155–11.353; p=0.797) or left-septal capture (HR 2.653, 95% CI 0.533–13.218; p=0.234). In contrast, deep-septal capture was associated with a significantly higher risk of the primary outcome (HR 5.204, 95% CI 1.213–22.321; p=0.026).</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Confirmed LBB capture resulted in more physiological ventricular activation, with shorter paced QRS and LVAT. Deep-septal capture was associated with a higher risk of adverse events, suggesting that achieving true conduction-system capture may be essential for optimizing the clinical benefit of LBBAP.</p>
Slides
Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease
Visit our site