Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39200900›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2024

Lumenless and Stylet-Driven Leads for Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing: Materials, Techniques, Benefits, and Trade-Offs of the Two Approaches.

Simone Taddeucci, Gianluca Mirizzi, Amato Santoro

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Riding the Highs and Lows of the Conduction System Pacing Wave-Our Experience.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 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

3 authors.

Simone TaddeucciDivision of Biotechnology, University of Siena, Viale Bracci 1, 53100 Siena, Italy.ORCID 0009-0001-9661-6955
Gianluca MirizziDivision of Cardiology, Tuscany Foundation 'Gabriele Monasterio', Via Moruzzi, 1, 56100 Pisa, Italy.
Amato SantoroDivision of Interventional Cardiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Viale Bracci 1, 53100 Siena, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2629-4372

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBPa) is an innovative technique for physiological pacing. Compared with His bundle pacing, LBBPa provides better pacing thresholds, lower rates of macrodislodgment, and a reliable strategy for cardiac resynchronization. LBBPa traditionally employs lumenless leads (LLL), which are characterized by small lead bodies and a fixed helix design. These features guarantee stability, avoid helix retraction, and facilitate easier septal penetration, all contributing to an advantageous learning curve. On the other hand, stylet-driven pacing leads (SDL) have shown comparable success rates related to lumenless pacing leads, although they carry risks of helix retraction and lead fracture. SDL have been increasingly employed with favorable results, as they provide good maneuverability and support during implantation with continuous monitoring of ECG-paced morphology. Different manufacturers are offering a variety of SDL, and new dedicated tools are being developed to simplify lead implantation. In this review, we examine the procedural techniques, advantages, and limitations of the most commonly used pacing leads and tools for LBBPa, and we summarize the complications associated with both lumenless leads (LLL) and stylet-driven leads (SDL).

Indexed as

left bundle branch area pacinglumenless leadspacemaker implantationstylet-driven leads

Identifiers

PMID39200900
PMCPMC11355410

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.