ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2025
Effectiveness of upgrade left bundle branch area pacing for right ventricular pacing-induced cardiomyopathy: Extra QRS shortening matters.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of QRS Notch Resolution During LV-Only Fusion Pacing With Early Left Ventricular Reverse Remodeling After Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of upgrade left bundle branch area pacing for right ventricular pacing-induced cardiomyopathy: Extra QRS shortening matters.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has developed as a strategy for patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM). We aimed to compare the upgrade effectiveness between LBBAP and traditional biventricular pacing (BVP) in PICM patients. Methods: Consecutive PICM patients with successful device upgrades were enrolled. The primary outcome was the echocardiographic response, defined as absolute left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement ≥5% at 6-month follow up. Results: A total of 92 patients were included. 61 underwent BVP and 31 underwent LBBAP. The median RVP burden was 96.8% (IQR: 93.0-99.0%). LBBAP achieved a shorter paced QRS duration (QRSd) compared with BVP (145.9 ± 22.4 ms vs. 157.5 ± 26.5 ms; Conclusion: LBBAP improved echocardiographic response compared with BVP in PICM patients. The superior efficacy of LBBAP in reverse remodeling was dependent on improved electrical synchrony.
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.