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 Cardiology2024
Multipoint pacing is associated with improved prognosis and cardiac resynchronization therapy response: MORE-CRT MPP randomized study secondary analyses.
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, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Redefining response to cardiac resynchronization therapy: a post hoc analysis of the MORE-CRT MPP 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 · 2026Trial
- Exercise Capacity and the Force Frequency Relationship in Multi-Point Versus Single-Point Pacing: A Randomized Trial.Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2026Trial
- Multipoint pacing is associated with reduction of heart failure hospitalizations or death in patients who do not respond to cardiac resynchronization therapy: results of the MORE-CRT MPP randomized 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 · 2025Trial
- Lead replacement due to non-infectious reasons in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy in long-term follow-up.ESC heart failure · 2026Article
- Conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy upgrading and its effect on functional mitral regurgitation in patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- 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 · 2025Review
- [Left ventricular electrode placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2025Article
- Multipoint Left Ventricular Pacing as Alternative Approach in Cases of Biventricular Pacing Failure.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) via biventricular (BIV) pacing is indicated in patients with heart failure (HF), reduced ejection fraction, and prolonged QRS duration. Quadripolar leads and multipoint pacing (MPP) allow multiple left ventricle (LV) sites pacing. We aimed to assess the clinical benefit of MPP in patients who do not respond to standard BIV pacing. METHODS AND
resultsOverall, 3724 patients were treated with standard BIV pacing. After 6 months, 1639 patients were considered as CRT non-responders (echo-measured relative reduction in LV end-systolic volume (LVESV) < 15%) and randomized to MPP or BIV. We analysed 593 randomized patients (291 MPP, 302 BIV), who had BIV pacing >97% of the time before randomization and complete 12 months of clinical and echocardiographic data. The endpoint composed of freedom from cardiac death and HF hospitalizations and by LVESV relative reduction ≥15% between randomization and 12 months occurred more frequently in MPP [96/291 (33.0%)] vs. BIV [71/302 (23.5%), P = 0.0103], which was also confirmed at multivariate analysis (hazard ratio = 1.55, 95% confidence interval = 1.02-2.34, P = 0.0402 vs. BIV). HF hospitalizations occurred less frequently in MPP [14/291 (4.81%)] vs. BIV [29/302 (9.60%), incidence rate ratio = 50%, P = 0.0245]. Selecting patients with a large (>30 ms) dispersion of interventricular electrical delay among the four LV lead dipoles, reverse remodelling was more frequent in MPP [18/51 (35.3%)] vs. BIV [11/62 (17.7%), P = 0.0335].
conclusionIn patients who do not respond to standard CRT despite the high BIV pacing percentage, MPP is associated with lower occurrence of HF hospitalizations and higher probability of reverse LV remodelling compared with BIV 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.