ArticleHerz2024
Safety assessment of coronary arteries during left bundle branch area pacing.
Article in Herz, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to assess the safety of left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) by measuring the distance from the tip of the electrode to the nearby coronary artery with a nine-partition grid method.
methodsFrom January 2019 to October 2020, patients who underwent LBBAP and postoperative coronary angiography in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University were included in the study. The patients' fluoroscopic images of LBBAP and coronary angiography were collected and analyzed. Changes in the ST‑T segment in the electrocardiogram (ECG), serum troponin, and myocardial enzyme profiles were observed before and after the LBBAP procedure.
resultsA total of 50 patients were included in this study, of whom 46 patients underwent implantation with a pacemaker and 4 patients received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). The pacing electrodes were confined to the posterior-middle (PM), median (M), Posterior inferior (PI), and middle inferior (MI) positions of the two-dimensional nine-square grid or in the junction area of the above positions, and were concentrated in the rectangle formed by the line of the center points of the four positions. The average vertical distances from the electrode tip to the left anterior descending branch artery (LAD), posterior descending branches (PD) and the left posterior ventricular branches (PL) were 19.69 ± 8.72 mm, 26.09 ± 8.02 mm, and 21.11 ± 7.86 mm, respectively; the minimum was 5.28 mm, 9.51 mm, and 8.69 mm, respectively. Coronary angiography in all patients showed no significant injury to the ventricular septal branch; however, we observed elevated serum troponin and changes in ST‑T segment in ECG.
conclusionThe study demonstrates that pacing electrodes in LBBAP can be safely implanted over a wide range. Coronary arteries are likely to be safe when the pacing electrodes are located within the rectangle formed by the line connecting the PM, M, PI, and MI zone centroids. The left bundle branch can be quickly captured and the safety of the coronary artery can be improved by locating the electrode in the posterior-mid zone. The potential risk of injury to the LAD from the electrode is greater compared with the PD.
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.