ArticleEuropean heart journal. Case reports2024
Reverse electrical remodelling after cardiac resynchronization therapy in a patient undergoing left bundle branch area pacing: a case report.
Article in European heart journal. Case reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Left bundle cardiac resynchronization therapy versus left bundle optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy.Indian pacing and electrophysiology journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has been introduced as an alternative to biventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Several studies describe echocardiographic reverse remodelling after LBBAP. Reverse electrical remodelling after LBBAP has not yet been described. Case summary: A 77-year-old female with non-ischaemic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction [left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 30-35%], left bundle branch block (QRS duration 164 ms), and symptomatic atrial fibrillation irresponsive to pharmacological therapy was evaluated for CRT with LBBAP and atrioventricular node ablation. Successful LBBAP implantation resulted in confirmed left bundle branch capture. Immediately after implantation, paced QRS duration was 194 ms with a long stimulus-V6RWPT (time to peak R wave in V6) of 93 ms, suggesting distal conduction system disease. Patient showed an echocardiographic improvement (LVEF 35-50%) and improvement in symptoms (NYHA class III to NYHA class II) at 1-year follow-up. Moreover, an improvement in conduction delays was found present. Paced QRS duration improved to 159 ms and stimulus-V6RWPT improved to 78 ms. This improvement might be due to reverse electrical remodelling. Discussion: This case demonstrates that LBBAP can induce reverse electrical remodelling, even in the presence of distal conduction system disease. With the current availability of different pacing strategies in CRT (i.e. biventricular CRT, LBBAP, and left bundle branch-optimized CRT), more research on patient selection and pacing strategy selection is needed.
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.