Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36233590›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

The Effects of His Bundle Pacing Compared to Classic Resynchronization Therapy in Patients with Pacing-Induced Cardiomyopathy.

Rafal Gardas, Krzysztof S Golba, Tomasz Soral, Jolanta Biernat, Piotr Kulesza, Mateusz Sajdok, Kamil Zub

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. New Insights into Pacing Induced Cardiomyopathy.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024
    Review
  5. Conduction system pacing upgradeFrontiers in physiology · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rafal GardasDepartment of Electrocardiology, Leszek Giec Upper-Silesian Medical Centre, Silesian Medical University, 40-055 Katowice, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-0002-1955
Krzysztof S GolbaDepartment of Electrocardiology, Leszek Giec Upper-Silesian Medical Centre, Silesian Medical University, 40-055 Katowice, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-5722-7976
Tomasz SoralDepartment of Electrocardiology, Leszek Giec Upper-Silesian Medical Centre, Silesian Medical University, 40-055 Katowice, Poland.
Jolanta BiernatDepartment of Electrocardiology, Leszek Giec Upper-Silesian Medical Centre, Silesian Medical University, 40-055 Katowice, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-4396-9001
Piotr KuleszaDepartment of Electrocardiology, Leszek Giec Upper-Silesian Medical Centre, Silesian Medical University, 40-055 Katowice, Poland.
Mateusz SajdokDepartment of Electrocardiology, Leszek Giec Upper-Silesian Medical Centre, Silesian Medical University, 40-055 Katowice, Poland.
Kamil ZubDepartment of Electrocardiology, Leszek Giec Upper-Silesian Medical Centre, Silesian Medical University, 40-055 Katowice, Poland.
Medical University of Silesia · PL

Funding

Medical University of Silesia KNW-1-122/K/9/0
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) is among the most common right ventricular pacing complications. Upgrading to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is the recommended treatment option. Conduction system pacing with His bundle pacing (HBP) has the potential to restore synchronous ventricular activation and can be an alternative to biventricular pacing (BVP). Patients with PICM scheduled for a system upgrade to CRT were included in the prospective cohort study. Either HBP or BVP was used for CRT. Electrocardiographic, clinical, and echocardiographic measurements were recorded at baseline and six-month follow-up. HBP was successful in 44 of 53 patients (83%). Thirty-nine patients with HBP and 22 with BVP completed a 6-month follow-up. HBP led to a higher reduction in QRS duration than BVP, 118.3 ± 14.20 ms vs. 150.5 ± 18.64 ms, p < 0.0001. The improvement in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class by one or two was more common in patients with HBP than those with BiV (p = 0.04). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improved in BVP patients from 32.9 ± 7.93% to 43.9 ± 8.07%, p < 0.0001, and in HBP patients from 34.9 ± 6.45% to 48.6 ± 7.73%, p < 0.0001. The improvement in LVEF was more considerable in HBP patients than in BVP patients, p = 0.019. The improvement in clinical outcomes and left ventricle reverse remodeling was more significant with HBP than BVP. HBP can be a valid alternative to BVP for upgrade procedures in PICM patients.

Indexed as

cardiac resynchronization therapyconduction system pacingHis bundle pacingpacing-induced cardiomyopathy

Identifiers

PMID36233590
PMCPMC9573163
OpenAlexW4297538829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.