ArticleClinical cardiology2025
Long-Term Effects of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Traditional Right Ventricular Pacing on Atrial Fibrillation After Dual-Chamber Pacemaker Implantation.
Article in Clinical cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Updated Meta-Analysis of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Right Ventricular Pacing in Conduction System Disorders: Insights From New Evidence.Clinical cardiology · 2026Pooled it
- Risk factors of atrial fibrillation progression in patients with congenital heart disease.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing in Older Patients: A New Opportunity?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTraditional right ventricular pacing (RVP) can lead to asynchronous cardiac mechanical contractions and increase the risk of atrial fibrillation (AF). This study aimed to compare the occurrence of new-onset AF and the progression of AF between novel physiological pacing-left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) and RVP with a long-term follow-up. METHODS AND
resultsPatients with a dual-chamber permanent pacemaker initial implantation, no history of persistent AF, and an expected high proportion of ventricular pacing (VP ≥ 20%) were included in this retrospective cohort study (LBBAP, n = 122; RVP, n = 166). The pacing QRS duration (QRSd) of the LBBAP was significantly shorter than that of the RVP (113 ± 22 vs. 140 ± 27 ms, p < 0.001), while the intrinsic QRSd values from the two groups were comparable. During a mean follow-up of 21.9 ± 9.4 months, the composite outcome of postoperative new-onset AF or AF progression was higher in the RVP group than in the LBBAP group (RVP HR 2.62, 95%CI 1.21-5.67, p = 0.014). Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) levels decreased in the LBBAP group at 1 year follow-up (50 ± 6 vs. baseline 48 ± 6, p = 0.002).
conclusionsIn a mean follow-up period of 2 years, compared to RVP, LBBAP patients with VP ≥ 20% had a decreased risk of occurrence and progression of AF events.
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.