ReviewCurrent health sciences journal
Update in LV Only Fusion CRT Pacing: Annals and Future Perspectives.
Review in Current health sciences journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pacing-Induced Cardiomyopathy in Leadless and Transvenous Pacemakers: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression.Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Triple-chamber cardiac devices are utilized for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and is the standard-of-care therapy for heart failure (HF) patients in the current guidelines. In the setting of biventricular (BIV) pacing it involves a mandatory implantation of right ventricular (RV) lead that allows simultaneous BIV pacing with 0 ms VV (ventricular to ventricular) interval. Nevertheless, it seems that response to CRT is not related to RV lead position. RV pacing is known for deleterious effects on RV/Left Ventricle (LV) function and should not be used in persons with normal atrioventricular conduction (AV) and sinus rhythm. As it compensates for the additional asynchrony induced by unnecessary stimulation of RV pacing, only pacing the left ventricle (LV) may result in improved cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) outcomes and a decrease in the number of individuals who do not respond to the procedure. Furthermore, leadless LV fusion CRT pacing without RV lead could be a potential CRT therapy alternative to BIV pacing in nonischemic heart failure patients with preserved AV conduction. The aim of our study is to made an update in cardiac resynchronization therapy with LV only fusion pacing.
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.