SynthesisJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2021
Safety and efficacy of His-bundle pacing/left bundle branch area pacing versus right ventricular pacing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Clinical and electrical outcomes of conduction system pacing versus right ventricular pacing in atrioventricular block: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Pooled it
- Updated Meta-Analysis of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Right Ventricular Pacing in Conduction System Disorders: Insights From New Evidence.Clinical cardiology · 2026Pooled it
- Risk of Atrial Fibrillation Following Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing versus Right Ventricular Pacing and Biventricular Pacing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Novel dyssynchrony burden index and right ventricular function for mortality risk stratification in right ventricular apical pacing - a retrospective cohort study.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2026Article
- Feasibility and Safety of Atrioventricular Node Pacing in a Patient With Heart Failure and Atrioventricular Block: Results at 2-Year Follow-Up.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
- Safety and performance of the Medtronic 3830 lead in His-bundle and Left bundle branch area pacing: A single-center experience.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2025Article
- Early Deterioration of the Right Ventricular Pacing Threshold Predicts the Increase in His-Bundle Pacing Threshold During the Chronic Phase: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Article
- A Meta-Analysis of Clinical and Echocardiographic Outcomes of Physiological Versus Conventional Pacing.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Current Advance, Challenges and Future Perspectives of Conduction System Pacing.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Review
- Permanent left bundle branch area pacing improves mitral regurgitation and cardiac function in patients with right bundle branch block.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Article
- Conduction System Pacing: Hope, Challenges, and the Journey Forward.Current cardiology reports · 2024Review
- Disorders of cardiac rhythm in China.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2024Article
- When Good Goes Bad: Interventricular Septal Hematoma Complicating Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing.JACC. Case reports · 2023Article
- Conduction system pacing learning curve: Left bundle pacing compared to His bundle pacing.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2023Article
- Is left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) associated with better depolarization and repolarization kinetics than right ventricular mid septal pacing (RVSP)? - Comparison of frontal QRS -T angle in patients with LBBP, RVSP and normal ventricular conduction.Indian pacing and electrophysiology journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent studies have demonstrated that right ventricular pacing (RVP) has deleterious effects on non-synchronized ventricular contraction, while His-bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) contribute to improvements in patients' mid- and long-term outcomes. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of physiologic pacing (HBP/LBBaP) versus those of RVP.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase was conducted for studies that compared the effects of physiologic pacing and RVP. All eligible studies were published before January 1, 2021 and were conducted in humans. STATA software version 15.0 was used for all the data analyses.
resultsTwenty articles (n = 2787 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. Compared to RVP, physiologic pacing was associated with a significantly shorter QRS duration and better cardiac function. Physiologic pacing was also correlated with lower rates of mitral regurgitation, pacing-induced cardiomyopathy, death, heart failure hospitalization, and atrial fibrillation, although the above results were not statistically significant. In addition, RVP led to the achievement of higher success rates than physiologic pacing, a shorter fluoroscopic time and mean procedure duration, a lower pacing threshold: the results were statistically significant. Compared with HBP, LBBaP appeared to have some advantages in R wave amplitudes, pacing threshold, fluoroscopic time, procedure time, and success rate, with statistically significant differences. Whereas HBP was associated with fewer surgical complications and shorter QRS duration, the results were not statistically significant.
conclusionPhysiologic pacing (HBP/LBBaP) might be a better strategy than RVP and improve long-term clinical outcomes like cardiac function. Although LBBaP appears to have some advantages over HBP, the long-term benefits are still controversial. More large-scale randomized clinical trials are needed for further verification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34019186What 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.