Trial reportEuropean heart journal2016
Comparison of right ventricular septal pacing and right ventricular apical pacing in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators: the SEPTAL CRT Study.
Trial report in European heart journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Infective endocarditis involving MitraClipInfection · 2023Pooled it
- Right ventricular lead location and outcomes among patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy: A meta-analysis.Progress in cardiovascular diseasesPooled it
- Right ventricular lead location, right-left ventricular lead interaction, and long-term outcomes in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2018Trial
- Splenic abscess and infective endocarditis.Infection · 2025Article
- Clinical Decision Making and Technical Approaches in Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Procedures: A Step by Step Critical Appraisal of Literature.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- [Lead placement in cardiac implantable electronic devices].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2024Article
- Permanent Cardiac Pacing of the Right Ventricular Outflow Tract Guided by Real-time Assessment of Electromechanical Synchrony.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2024Article
- Conduction system pacing: how far are we from the "electrical" bypass?Heart failure reviews · 2024Review
- Right ventricular lead position can be critical in determining clinical response to cardiac resynchronization therapy-A case of successful cardiac resynchronization response conferred by relocating the right ventricular pacing lead.HeartRhythm case reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Estimation of left ventricular activation sequence in patients with heart failure using two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2023Article
- Risk factors of pacing dependence and cardiac dysfunction in patients with permanent pacemaker implantation.ESC heart failure · 2022Article
- Determinants of Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2022Article
- [ESC guidelines 2021 on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy : What's new?]Herz · 2022Review
- 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2022Article
- Cutaneous Vasculitis and Generalized Lymphadenopathy Associated with Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase (ESBL)-Producing Escherichia coli Endocarditis: A Rare Case Report.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2021Article
- Multipoint Pacing with Fusion-optimized Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: Using It All to Narrow QRS Duration.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2021Article
- Automated Localization of Focal Ventricular Tachycardia From Simulated Implanted Device Electrograms: A Combined Physics-AI Approach.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
- Prevention of non-response to cardiac resynchronization therapy: points to remember.Heart failure reviews · 2020Review
- Differential effect with septal and apical RV pacing on ventricular activation in patients with left bundle branch block assessed by non-invasive electrical imaging and in silico modelling.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a recommended treatment of heart failure (HF) patients with depressed left ventricular ejection fraction and wide QRS. The optimal right ventricular (RV) lead position being a matter of debate, we sought to examine whether RV septal (RVS) pacing was not inferior to RV apical (RVA) pacing on left ventricular reverse remodelling in patients receiving a CRT-defibrillator. METHODS AND
resultsPatients (n = 263, age = 63.4 ± 9.5 years) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to RVS (n = 131) vs. RVA (n = 132) pacing. Left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) reduction between baseline and 6 months was not different between the two groups (-25.3 ± 39.4 mL in RVS group vs. -29.3 ± 44.5 mL in RVA group, P = 0.79). Right ventricular septal pacing was not non-inferior (primary endpoint) to RVA pacing with regard to LVESV reduction (average difference = -4.06 mL; P = 0.006 with a -20 mL non-inferiority margin). The percentage of 'echo-responders' defined by LVESV reduction >15% between baseline and 6 months was similar in both groups (50%) with no difference in the time to first HF hospitalization or death (P = 0.532). Procedural or device-related serious adverse events occurred in 68 patients (RVS = 37) with no difference between the two groups (P = 0.401).
conclusionThis study demonstrates that septal RV pacing in CRT is non-inferior to apical RV pacing for LV reverse remodelling at 6 months with no difference in the clinical outcome. No recommendation for optimal RV lead position can hence be drawn from this study. CLINICALTRIALS GOV NUMBER: NCT 00833352.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.