Learning Curve for Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Lead Implantation

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has shown promising outcomes at experienced centers; however, less is known about the learning curve with initial adoption of LBBAP implantation. We conducted a retrospective analysis (2020-2023) of the learning curve for LBBAP at an academic medical center. Procedural success and device-related adverse events in adult patients undergoing LBBAP by seven new operators with >5 years' experience in device implantation were compared between operators with a history of ≤10 (LBBAP<sub>inexp</sub>) versus >10 (LBBAP<sub>exp</sub>) LBBAP implant attempts. Successful LBBAP was defined as a left ventricular activation time (LVAT) of ≤80 ms. Seven operators implanted LBBAP devices in 288 patients (age, 73 ± 11 years; 38% women), including 68 (24%) in the LBBAP<sub>inexp</sub> group versus 220 (76%) patients in the LBBAP<sub>exp</sub> group with similar baseline characteristics. The median number of implants per operator was 22 (range, 8-83). Post-implant LVAT ≤ 80 ms was less frequent in LBBAP<sub>inexp</sub> compared to LBBAP<sub>exp</sub> (56.9% vs 72.4%; <i>P</i> = .04). There were no significant differences in paced QRS duration ≤ 130 ms (75.9% vs. 76.1%; <i>P</i> = 1.0) or operator self-identified success (85% vs. 91%; <i>P</i> = .2). With new single-/dual-chamber device implants, there was no difference in implant duration (103.4 ± 31.8 vs. 101.6 ± 38.5 min; <i>P</i> = .3), but there was longer fluoroscopy with LBBAP<sub>inexp</sub> (12.6 ± 10.1 vs. 8.2 ± 8.0 min; <i>P</i> < .0001). The average number of attempts at LBBAP was lower with LBBAP<sub>inexp</sub> versus LBBAP<sub>exp</sub> (2.0 ± 1.5 vs. 2.9 ± 2.9; <i>P</i> = .03). There was no difference in device-related adverse events between the two groups (<i>P</i> = .3). Operators use less fluoroscopy, make more attempts at LBBAP, and more frequently achieve LVAT ≤ 80 ms after their first 10 implants.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Innovations in Cardiac Rhythm Management
Published
2025-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.19102/icrm.2025.16055
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.16
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Learning Curve for Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Lead Implantation

Amulya Gupta, David Fritz, Seth H. Sheldon, Ahmed Shahab et al.
3 citations
Journal of Innovations in Cardiac Rhythm Management
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
4.16
article

Learning Curve for Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Lead Implantation

Amulya Gupta, David Fritz, Seth H. Sheldon, Ahmed Shahab, Amit Noheria, Hannah Zerr, Ben Ose, Caroline Trupp, Maci Clark
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has shown promising outcomes at experienced centers; however, less is known about the learning curve with initial adoption of LBBAP implantation. We conducted a retrospective analysis (2020-2023) of the learning curve for LBBAP at an academic medical center. Procedural success and device-related adverse events in adult patients undergoing LBBAP by seven new operators with >5 years' experience in device implantation were compared between operators with a history of ≤10 (LBBAP<sub>inexp</sub>) versus >10 (LBBAP<sub>exp</sub>) LBBAP implant attempts. Successful LBBAP was defined as a left ventricular activation time (LVAT) of ≤80 ms. Seven operators implanted LBBAP devices in 288 patients (age, 73 ± 11 years; 38% women), including 68 (24%) in the LBBAP<sub>inexp</sub> group versus 220 (76%) patients in the LBBAP<sub>exp</sub> group with similar baseline characteristics. The median number of implants per operator was 22 (range, 8-83). Post-implant LVAT ≤ 80 ms was less frequent in LBBAP<sub>inexp</sub> compared to LBBAP<sub>exp</sub> (56.9% vs 72.4%; <i>P</i> = .04). There were no significant differences in paced QRS duration ≤ 130 ms (75.9% vs. 76.1%; <i>P</i> = 1.0) or operator self-identified success (85% vs. 91%; <i>P</i> = .2). With new single-/dual-chamber device implants, there was no difference in implant duration (103.4 ± 31.8 vs. 101.6 ± 38.5 min; <i>P</i> = .3), but there was longer fluoroscopy with LBBAP<sub>inexp</sub> (12.6 ± 10.1 vs. 8.2 ± 8.0 min; <i>P</i> < .0001). The average number of attempts at LBBAP was lower with LBBAP<sub>inexp</sub> versus LBBAP<sub>exp</sub> (2.0 ± 1.5 vs. 2.9 ± 2.9; <i>P</i> = .03). There was no difference in device-related adverse events between the two groups (<i>P</i> = .3). Operators use less fluoroscopy, make more attempts at LBBAP, and more frequently achieve LVAT ≤ 80 ms after their first 10 implants.

Journal of Innovations in Cardiac Rhythm ManagementVol. 16(5)
University of Kansas (US), University of Kansas Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
4.16
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.