ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2023
Worldwide survey on implantation of and outcomes for conduction system pacing with His bundle and left bundle branch area pacing leads.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical indications for conduction system pacing in routine practice: 2025 survey from the Home Monitoring Expert Alliance.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Article
- Preserving Access After Lead Extraction in Venous Stenosis Using Snaring: The Cowboy Bridge Technique.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 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
- Mid-term clinical outcomes of left bundle branch area pacing compared to accurate right ventricular septal pacing.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2025Observational
- Complications, Troubleshooting and Follow-up for Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2025Review
- Current Advance, Challenges and Future Perspectives of Conduction System Pacing.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Conduction System Pacing: Hope, Challenges, and the Journey Forward.Current cardiology reports · 2024Review
- Left bundle branch area pacing via persistent superior vena cava: A case report.HeartRhythm case reports · 2024Article
- Is Conduction System Pacing Going to Be the New Gold Standard for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy?Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- His Bundle Pacing: Predicting Mortality and Major Complications in Mid-Term Follow-Up.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Advances in cardiac pacing with leadless pacemakers and conduction system pacing.Current opinion in cardiology · 2024Review
- Transvenous Lead Extraction during Cardiac Implantable Device Upgrade: Results from the Multicenter Swiss Lead Extraction Registry.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Real-World Performance of Conduction System Pacing Compared With Traditional Pacing.Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology · 2023Article
- Comparison of Depolarization and Repolarization Parameters in Left vs. Right Ventricular Septal Pacing-An Intraprocedural Electrocardiographic Study.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
92 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdoption and outcomes for conduction system pacing (CSP), which includes His bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), in real-world settings are incompletely understood. We sought to describe real-world adoption of CSP lead implantation and subsequent outcomes.
methodsWe performed an online cross-sectional survey on the implantation and outcomes associated with CSP, between November 15, 2020, and February 15, 2021. We described survey responses and reported HBP and LBBAP outcomes for bradycardia pacing and cardiac resynchronization CRT indications, separately.
resultsThe analysis cohort included 140 institutions, located on 5 continents, who contributed data to the worldwide survey on CSP. Of these, 127 institutions (90.7%) reported experience implanting CSP leads. CSP and overall device implantation volumes were reported by 84 institutions. In 2019, the median proportion of device implants with CSP, HBP, and/or LBBAP leads attempted were 4.4% (interquartile range [IQR], 1.9-12.5%; range, 0.4-100%), 3.3% (IQR, 1.3-7.1%; range, 0.2-87.0%), and 2.5% (IQR, 0.5-24.0%; range, 0.1-55.6%), respectively. For bradycardia pacing indications, HBP leads, as compared to LBBAP leads, had higher reported implant threshold (median [IQR]: 1.5 V [1.3-2.0 V] vs 0.8 V [0.6-1.0 V], p = 0.0008) and lower ventricular sensing (median [IQR]: 4.0 mV [3.0-5.0 mV] vs. 10.0 mV [7.0-12.0 mV], p < 0.0001).
conclusionIn conclusion, CSP lead implantation has been broadly adopted but has yet to become the default approach at most surveyed institutions. As the indications and data for CSP continue to evolve, strategies to educate and promote CSP lead implantation at institutions without CSP lead implantation experience would be necessary.
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.