Conduction system pacing associated with reduced heart failure hospitalizations and all-cause mortality compared with traditional right ventricular pacing in the Medicare population.

Background: Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as an alternative therapy to traditional right ventricular (RV) pacing. However, most CSP studies reflect small cohorts or single-center experience.

Objective: This analysis compared CSP with dual-chamber (DC) RV pacing in a large, population-based cohort using data from the Micra Coverage with Evidence Development study.

Methods: Medicare administrative claims data were used to identify patients implanted with a DC RV pacemaker. Lead placement data from Medtronic's device registration system identified patients treated with CSP (n = 6197) using a 3830 catheter-delivered lead or DC RV (non-3830 lead, non-CSP placement; n = 16,989) at the same centers. CSP patients were stratified into left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP; n = 4738) and His bundle pacing (HBP; n = 1459). Incident heart failure hospitalizations, all-cause mortality, complication rates, and reinterventions at 6 months were analyzed.

Results: CSP patients with a 3830 catheter-delivered lead experienced significantly lower rates of incident heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; P = .02) and all-cause mortality at 6 months compared with DC RV patients (HR, 0.66; P < .0001). There was no difference in chronic complications (HR, 0.97; P = .62) or need for reintervention (HR, 0.95; P = .63) with CSP compared with DC RV, although LBBAP patients experienced significantly lower rates of complications (HR, 0.71; P = .001) compared with HBP.

Conclusion: DC pacemaker patients treated with CSP using a 3830 catheter-delivered lead experienced significant all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalization benefits compared with DC RV pacing. LBBAP had lower complications compared with HBP. These real-world results align with findings in small clinical studies demonstrating the benefits of CSP.