Conduction system pacing (CSP) is being increasingly adopted as a more physiological alternative to right ventricular and biventricular pacing. Since the 2021 European Society of Cardiology pacing guidelines, there has been growing evidence that this therapy is safe and effective. Furthermore, left bundle branch area pacing was not covered in these guidelines due to limited evidence at that time. This Clinical Consensus Statement provides advice on indications for CSP, taking into account the significant evolution in this domain.

• Klíčová slova
• Biventricular pacing, Cardiac resynchronization therapy, Conduction system pacing, His bundle pacing, Indications, Left bundle branch area pacing,
• MeSH
• akční potenciály MeSH
• kardiologie * normy   MeSH
• kardiostimulace umělá * normy   škodlivé účinky   metody   MeSH
• konsensus MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• převodní systém srdeční * patofyziologie   MeSH
• společnosti lékařské MeSH
• srdeční arytmie * terapie   patofyziologie   diagnóza   MeSH
• srdeční frekvence MeSH
• výsledek terapie MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• směrnice pro lékařskou praxi MeSH
• Geografické názvy
• Evropa MeSH

BACKGROUND: Adoption and outcomes for conduction system pacing (CSP), which includes His bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), in real-world settings are incompletely understood. We sought to describe real-world adoption of CSP lead implantation and subsequent outcomes. METHODS: We performed an online cross-sectional survey on the implantation and outcomes associated with CSP, between November 15, 2020, and February 15, 2021. We described survey responses and reported HBP and LBBAP outcomes for bradycardia pacing and cardiac resynchronization CRT indications, separately. RESULTS: The analysis cohort included 140 institutions, located on 5 continents, who contributed data to the worldwide survey on CSP. Of these, 127 institutions (90.7%) reported experience implanting CSP leads. CSP and overall device implantation volumes were reported by 84 institutions. In 2019, the median proportion of device implants with CSP, HBP, and/or LBBAP leads attempted were 4.4% (interquartile range [IQR], 1.9-12.5%; range, 0.4-100%), 3.3% (IQR, 1.3-7.1%; range, 0.2-87.0%), and 2.5% (IQR, 0.5-24.0%; range, 0.1-55.6%), respectively. For bradycardia pacing indications, HBP leads, as compared to LBBAP leads, had higher reported implant threshold (median [IQR]: 1.5 V [1.3-2.0 V] vs 0.8 V [0.6-1.0 V], p = 0.0008) and lower ventricular sensing (median [IQR]: 4.0 mV [3.0-5.0 mV] vs. 10.0 mV [7.0-12.0 mV], p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, CSP lead implantation has been broadly adopted but has yet to become the default approach at most surveyed institutions. As the indications and data for CSP continue to evolve, strategies to educate and promote CSP lead implantation at institutions without CSP lead implantation experience would be necessary.

• Klíčová slova
• Conduction system pacing, His bundle pacing, Left bundle branch area pacing,
• MeSH
• bradykardie * terapie   MeSH
• elektrokardiografie MeSH
• Hisův svazek * MeSH
• kardiostimulace umělá MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• nemoci převodního systému srdečního MeSH
• převodní systém srdeční MeSH
• průřezové studie MeSH
• výsledek terapie MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH