Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40515957›Full record

ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2025

Safety and performance of the Medtronic 3830 lead in His-bundle and Left bundle branch area pacing: A single-center experience.

Alejandro Sanchez-Nadales, Abdullah Sarkar, Jose Sleiman, Andres Sanchez-Nadales, Mileydis Alonso, John Bibawy, Marcelo Helguera, Sergio Pinski, Jose Baez-Escudero

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

Alejandro Sanchez-NadalesRobert and Suzanne Tomsich Department of Cardiology, Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston Campus, Weston, FL, 33324, USA. asanc86@uic.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1531-5032
Abdullah SarkarRobert and Suzanne Tomsich Department of Cardiology, Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston Campus, Weston, FL, 33324, USA.
Jose SleimanRobert and Suzanne Tomsich Department of Cardiology, Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston Campus, Weston, FL, 33324, USA.
Andres Sanchez-NadalesRobert and Suzanne Tomsich Department of Cardiology, Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston Campus, Weston, FL, 33324, USA.
Mileydis AlonsoRobert and Suzanne Tomsich Department of Cardiology, Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston Campus, Weston, FL, 33324, USA.
John BibawyRobert and Suzanne Tomsich Department of Cardiology, Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston Campus, Weston, FL, 33324, USA.
Marcelo HelgueraRobert and Suzanne Tomsich Department of Cardiology, Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston Campus, Weston, FL, 33324, USA.
Sergio PinskiRobert and Suzanne Tomsich Department of Cardiology, Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston Campus, Weston, FL, 33324, USA.
Jose Baez-EscuderoRobert and Suzanne Tomsich Department of Cardiology, Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston Campus, Weston, FL, 33324, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConduction system pacing (CSP) using His Bundle Pacing (HBP) and Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing (LBAP) is an evolving alternative to traditional right ventricular pacing (RVP), promising better physiological outcomes. This study evaluates the safety, feasibility, and performance of HBP and LBAP with Medtronic SelectSecure 3830 leads.

methodsWe conducted a single-center retrospective analysis of 490 patients undergoing HBP or LBAP. The study assessed implant success rates, pacing thresholds, device longevity, and complication rates over an average follow-up of 28 months for HBP and 14 months for LBAP.

resultsThe implantation success rate was 85% for HBP and 97.4% for LBAP. LBAP demonstrated lower and more stable pacing thresholds, with initial values of 0.8V at 0.5 ms rising slightly to 0.9V at 0.5 ms, and fewer device revisions compared to HBP, whose initial pacing threshold of 1.3V at 0.8ms increased to 1.68 V at 0.7ms. Complications were minimal and similar across both groups. The need for fewer device revisions and potential for prolonged device life highlighted LBAP as potentially more cost-effective. Cardiac function measured by LVEF remained stable across both groups.

conclusionsBoth HBP and LBAP are safe and feasible with comparable safety profiles. LBAP may offer advantages in terms of stability, fewer revisions, and extended device longevity. The study underscores the need for further research into optimal lead positioning and long-term outcomes of CSP, particularly for LBAP.

Indexed as

Bundle-Branch BlockBundle of HisCardiac Pacing, ArtificialElectrodes, ImplantedPacemaker, ArtificialAgedEquipment DesignFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentTreatment OutcomeConduction system pacingHis bundle pacingLeft bundle branch area pacingSelectSecure 3830

Identifiers

PMID40515957
PMCPMC12644127

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.