Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36916199›Full record

Trial reportEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2023

Conduction system pacing, a European survey: insights from clinical practice.

Daniel Keene, Frédéric Anselme, Haran Burri, Óscar Cano Pérez, Karol Čurila, Michael Derndorfer, Paul Foley, László Gellér, Michael Glikson, Wim Huybrechts and 10 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in 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, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed
17.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Conduction system pacing vs. biventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronization: the CSP-SYNC randomized single centre study.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 · 2025
    Trial
  2. Two-year outcomes of left bundle branch area pacing versus traditional right ventricular pacing in middle-aged adults: a registry-based trial.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 · 2025
    Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 · 2026
    Article
  8. Distinct intracardiac electrogram waveforms with perforation during left bundle branch area pacing implantation.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 · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Controversy: in heart failure patients with a reduced ejection fraction and left bundle branch block, conduction system pacing can be a valid alternative to biventricular pacing-pro and contra.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 · 2025
    Review
  11. [ICD electrode implantation for left bundle branch area pacing].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2025
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Left ventricular septal pacing combined with left ventricular pacing improves acute electric resynchronization, hemodynamic responses and clinical outcomes: results of SPORT study.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 · 2025
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. Arrhythmia care in ESC member countries: the 2025 ESC-EHRA atlas on heart rhythm disorders.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 · 2025
    Article
  17. Conduction system pacing after atrioventricular junction ablation.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 · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. How harmful is right ventricular pacing? The question revived by the BioPace trial.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 · 2025
    Article
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

20 authors at 18 institutions in 14 countries.

Daniel KeeneNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Du Cane Road, London W12, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7472-7358
Frédéric AnselmeDepartment of Cardiology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rouen Charles Nicolle, Rouen, France.ORCID 0000-0002-2130-9790
Haran BurriDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-4393-5338
Óscar Cano PérezUnidad de Arritmias, Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-6783-0138
Karol ČurilaDepartment of Cardiology, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0003-3523-6358
Michael DerndorferDepartment of Internal Medicine 2 with Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care, Ordensklinikum Linz Elisabethinen, Linz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-0685-0845
Paul FoleyWiltshire Cardiac Centre, Great Western Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Swindon, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4856-832X
László GellérSemmelweis University, Cardiovascular Center, Budapest, Hungary.
Michael GliksonDepartment of Cardiology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center and Hebrew University faculty of medicine, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID 0000-0001-5706-0395
Wim HuybrechtsDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Antwerp, Edegem, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-2964-8068
Marek JastrzebskiFirst Department of Cardiology, Interventional Electrocardiology and Hypertension, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-3318-6601
Krzysztof KaczmarekElectrocardiology Department, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-1356-5249
Grigorios KatsourasDepartment of Cardiology, 'F. Miulli' Hospital, Acquaviva delle Fonti, Bari, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0324-5623
Jonathan LyneCardiology Department, Beacon Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-0257-8629
Pablo Peñafiel VerdúArrhythmia Unit, Department of Cardiology, Virgen de la Arrixaca University Hospital, Murcia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0641-5077
Christian RestleDivision of Cardiology and Angiology II, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Bad Krozingen, Germany.
Sergio RichterDepartment of Cardiology, Heart Center Dresden, University Hospital, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7128-6411
Stefan TimmerDepartment of Cardiology, Northwest Clinics, Alkmaar, The Netherlands.
Kevin VernooyDepartment of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8818-5964
Zachary WhinnettNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Du Cane Road, London W12, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2775-5126
Imperial College London · GBAntwerp University Hospital · BECentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rouen · FRCharles University · CZGreat Western Hospital · GBHospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe · ESHospital Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca · ESJagiellonian University · PLKrankenhaus der Elisabethinen · ATMaastricht University · NLMedical University of Lodz · PLNorthwest Hospital · USOspedale Generale Regionale Francesco Miulli · ITSemmelweis University · HUShaare Zedek Medical Center · ILTechnische Universität Dresden · DEUniversitäts-Herzzentrum Freiburg-Bad Krozingen · DEUniversity Hospital of Geneva · CH

Funding

British Heart Foundation CS/15/3/31405
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThe field of conduction system pacing (CSP) is evolving, and our aim was to obtain a contemporary picture of European CSP practice. METHODS AND

resultsA survey was devised by a European CSP Expert Group and sent electronically to cardiologists utilizing CSP. A total of 284 physicians were invited to contribute of which 171 physicians (60.2%; 85% electrophysiologists) responded. Most (77%) had experience with both His-bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP). Pacing indications ranked highest for CSP were atrioventricular block (irrespective of left ventricular ejection fraction) and when coronary sinus lead implantation failed. For patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and heart failure (HF), conventional biventricular pacing remained first-line treatment. For most indications, operators preferred LBBAP over HBP as a first-line approach. When HBP was attempted as an initial approach, reasons reported for transitioning to utilizing LBBAP were: (i) high threshold (reported as >2 V at 1 ms), (ii) failure to reverse bundle branch block, or (iii) > 30 min attempting to implant at His-bundle sites. Backup right ventricular lead use for HBP was low (median 20%) and predominated in pace-and-ablate scenarios. Twelve-lead electrocardiogram assessment was deemed highly important during follow-up. This, coupled with limitations from current capture management algorithms, limits remote monitoring for CSP patients.

conclusionsThis survey provides a snapshot of CSP implementation in Europe. Currently, CSP is predominantly used for bradycardia indications. For HF patients with LBBB, most operators reserve CSP for biventricular implant failures. Left bundle branch area pacing ostensibly has practical advantages over HBP and is therefore preferred by many operators. Practical limitations remain, and large randomized clinical trial data are currently lacking.

Indexed as

Cardiac Resynchronization TherapyHeart FailureArrhythmias, CardiacBundle-Branch BlockHeart Conduction SystemHumansStroke VolumeTreatment OutcomeVentricular Function, LeftCSPHBPLBBAPSurvey

Identifiers

PMID36916199
PMCPMC10227660
OpenAlexW4324130311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.