Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40017670›Full record

ReviewArrhythmia & electrophysiology review2025

Conduction System Pacing for CRT: A Physiological Alternative.

Bengt Herweg, Mishal Mumtaz, Pugazhendhi Vijayaraman

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07604727 (AV Nodal Ablation With Conduction System Pacing Versus Cardiac Resynchronization for Symptomatic Heart Failure Patients With Atrial Fibrillation), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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.

NCT07604727 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

AV Nodal Ablation With Conduction System Pacing Versus Cardiac Resynchronization for Symptomatic Heart Failure Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: The APAF-CSP All-cause Mortality and Quality of Life Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Medical Center GroningenRan2026 to 2030Enrolled292ConditionsAtrial Fibrillation (AF), Heart Failure, Cardiac PacingArmsConduction System Pacing, Cardiac resynchronization therapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Conduction system pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy: a systematic review.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 · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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.

Bengt HerwegDivision of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine Tampa, FL, US.
Mishal MumtazDivision of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine Tampa, FL, US.
Pugazhendhi VijayaramanGeisinger Heart Institute Wilkes-Barre, PA, US.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are many factors contributing to the failure of conventional CRT with biventricular pacing, including coronary anatomy and an inability to stimulate diseased tissue. In this paper, we review evolving conduction system pacing (CSP), a physiological alternative to conventional CRT. CSP allows correction of bundle branch block and provides new opportunities to address multiple limitations of conventional CRT. Further studies are required to determine how the techniques are best applied in specific clinical situations.

Indexed as

biventricular pacingConduction system pacingCRTleft bundle branch area pacing

Identifiers

PMID40017670
PMCPMC11865673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.