Health-related quality of life among patients after cardiac resynchronization therapy: a comparison between biventricular and left bundle branch area pacing
Authors: Fernandez Sanchez J A , Garrido-Arroquia Jurado T , Sanchez-Moreno J M , Molina-Lerma M , Gutierrez-Ballesteros G , Frutos-Lopez M , Pavon-Jimenez R , Garcia-Mochon L , Jimenez-Jaimez J , Alvarez-Lopez M 
Published: May 2024

Background

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular pacing (BiVP) has the potential to improve cardiac function in patients with heart failure (HF). However, a portion of patients do not respond to therapy. Recently, left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has emerged as a more physiological alternative for CRT in selected cases (1,2). Quality of life (QoL) tools measures subjective experience and its results are relevant as they may help to assessed the impact that medical interventions have in patient's health.

Purpose

The authors sought to measure and compare the quality of life in a cohort of patients after the implantation of either a BiVP or a LBBaP CRT device.

Methods

A multicenter prospective quasi-experimental study in which consecutive patients underwent CRT was conducted. According to the study protocol, the four centers would perform their usual clinical practice: two out of them would perform conventional BiVP-CRT while the other half LBBAP-CRT. The health related QoL was measured by the Spanish version of the EuroQol Group’s five-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L), which the patients were asked to complete at baseline and 12 weeks after the CRT device implantation. The descriptive system section of the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire produces a 5-digit health state profile that can be converted into a single index value. The EQ-5D-5L Spanish index values range from -0.225 to 1.0 (full health). The EQ-5D visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) is a vertical scale numbered from 0 to 100 (the worst and the best health you can imagine). Both groups (BiVP and LBBaP) were compared with data from the general population of Spain for the EQ-5D-5L and EQ-VAS (n=20.587) according to the national survey (3).

Results

The study included 44 consecutive patients (31 males, mean age 66 ± 11 years, LVEF 28.9% ± 6.9%). The LBBAP procedure was finally performed in 27 patients, while BiVP was the therapy performed in the other 17 patients. Crossover rate was less than 12% (1 patient underwent rescue BiVP and 2 patients switched to LBBAP). The basal characteristics of included patients are presented in Table 1. Among the individuals with BiVP the mean EQ-5D-5L index score and the EQ-VAS score were 0.74±0.24 and 65.71±17.90 respectively at baseline while they were 0.83±0.19 [+0.08±0.16, p 0.054, CI 95%] and 76.59±15.76 three months later [+10.80±15.38, p 0.01, CI 95%]. In the LBBAP group, the mean EQ-5D-5L index score and the EQ-VAS score were 0.71±0.25 and 50.04±25.49 respectively at baseline while they were 0.80±0.19 [+0.09±0.22, p 0.044, CI 95%] and 69.30±23.53 [+19.26±22.83, p 0.0001, CI 95%] three months later.

Conclusion

It was found that the EQ-5D-5L index value and EQ-VAS improved in the LBBAP group. In the BiVP group only EQ-VAS improved although there was also a non-statistically significant trend in EQ-5D-5L index score. The main limitation of the study was the small sample size.Table 1Figure 1