Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40114092›Full record

ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2025

Clinical outcomes of His bundle pacing vs. right ventricular pacing in patients with conduction disturbances following transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Donghui Zhang, Qi Zhao, Shenglong Hou, Chao Qu, Ruoxi Zhang, Yanhui Gao, Ou Yang, Huimin Xian

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

8 authors.

Donghui Zhang *Department of Cardiology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, 150007, China.
Qi Zhao *Department of Cardiology, First Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, 150086, China.
Shenglong HouDepartment of Cardiology, Heilongjiang Provincial Hospital, Harbin, 163000, China.
Chao QuDepartment of Cardiology, Heilongjiang Provincial Hospital, Harbin, 163000, China.
Ruoxi ZhangDepartment of Cardiology, Suzhou Kowloon Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Suzhou, 215028, China. ruoxizhang8@qq.com.
Yanhui GaoDepartment of Cardiology, Forth Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, 150023, China.
Ou YangDepartment of Cadre Ward, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin, 130021, China.
Huimin XianDepartment of Cardiology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, 150007, China. xianhuimin12@126.com.

Funding

China Postdoctoral Science Foundation 2018M641870
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess and compare the clinical outcomes of His bundle pacing (HBP) versus right ventricular pacing (RVP) in patients who develop conduction disturbances following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

methodsIn this retrospective study, 120 patients who developed CD following TAVR were enrolled, and were implanted with HBP or RVP between January 2015 and December 2024. To adjust for variations in initial risk factors and baseline characteristics between patients who underwent HBP or RVP, we employed the propensity score matching. Each patient was matched in a 1:1 ratio with replacement. Patients who either received HBP or RVP, but could not be adequately matched, were excluded from the study population. Procedural and clinical outcomes were compared among different modalities at pacing implantation and12-month follow-up.

resultsPaced QRS duration, R-wave amplitude at implantation and at follow-up, impedance at follow-up were lower in HBP group compared to RVP group. At12-month follow-up, the decrease in pacing burden was significantly greater in the HBP group than in the RVP group. Pacing threshold at implantation and at follow-up and capture threshold at implantation and at follow-up were higher in HBP group compared to RVP group. During follow-up, the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and tricuspid regurgitation (TR) area in the HBP group showed a significant improvement compared to preoperative values, while no significant increase in LVEF was observed in the RVP group, with a clear statistical difference between the two groups. At 12-month follow-up, NT-proBNP levels in the HBP group were significantly lower than those in the RVP group. The rates of NYHA functional class II were higher, while the rates of NYHA functional class III and MACE were lower in the HBP group compared to the RVP group during follow-up.

conclusionsHBP was feasible and safe in patients after TAVR, demonstrating a reduction in the composite outcome of MACE and better cardiac function compared to RVP.

Indexed as

Arrhythmias, CardiacBundle of HisCardiac Pacing, ArtificialTranscatheter Aortic Valve ReplacementVentricular Function, RightAction PotentialsAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHeart RateHumansMaleRecovery of FunctionRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsCardiac functionConduction disturbancesHis bundle pacingRight ventricular pacingTranscatheter aortic valve replacement

Identifiers

PMID40114092
PMCPMC11924759

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.