Abstract 4367388: V-REMi: A Novel Electro-Mechanical Index Highlights Trends Toward Superior Remodeling with Conduction System Pacing
Abstract
Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) via conduction system pacing (CSP), particularly left bundle branch pacing (LBBP), offers a physiologic alternative to biventricular (BiV) pacing. However, comparative metrics for quantifying remodeling responses remain limited. We introduce the Ventricular Reverse Electro-Mechanical index (V-REMi) a novel composite score synthesizing changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), QRS duration, and LV end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) to assess global remodeling response to pacing strategies. Methods: A PRISMA-guided meta-analysis of studies comparing LBBP versus BiV pacing was conducted via PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL through March 2025. Inclusion required reporting ≥3 of the following outcomes: ΔLVEF, ΔQRS duration, ΔLVEDD. Statistical analysis included random-effects modeling, pooled mean differences, I2-based heterogeneity assessment, and predefined subgroup analyses by baseline LVEF, follow-up duration, QRS narrowing, and study design. The V-REMi index (range: 0–1) was derived from a tiered scoring system awarding points per domain (see image 1). The final score is the mean across domains. Results: Eight studies (n=603) qualified for analysis. Pooled results demonstrated significantly higher V-REMi scores with LBBP vs. BiV pacing (Mean Difference [MD] 0.20; 95% CI 0.00–0.40; p=0.05), though heterogeneity was high (I2=93%). Subgroup analysis favored LBBP in patients with LVEF ≥30% (MD 0.36), randomized designs (MD 0.23), and uniform QRS narrowing ≥30 ms. No significant effect was seen in observational cohorts. Conclusion: LBBP was associated with a superior electro-mechanical remodeling trend compared to BiV pacing, as captured by the V-REMi index. Despite high heterogeneity likely due to variable study design and imaging protocols, V-REMi consistently identified multidimensional CRT response. This index may serve as a useful surrogate endpoint in future CSP trials and guide therapy personalization.
Article Details
Authors (7)
Douglas Salguero
Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, United States
GODFREY TABOWEI
Texas Tech University HSC PB, Odessa, Texas, United States
Cristian Castillo Rodriguez
Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, United States
Ben Thiravetyan
TTUHSC, Lubbock, Texas, United States
Carlos Matute-Martinez
Texas Tech University, Odessa, Texas, United States
Ty Whisenant
Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, United States
Deephak Swaminath
Texas Tech University Health sciences center, Lubbock, Texas, United States