Observational studyEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2025
Left ventricular septal pacing combined with left ventricular pacing improves acute electric resynchronization, hemodynamic responses and clinical outcomes: results of SPORT study.
Observational study in 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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Left bundle branch pacing is a superior pacing strategy compared to left ventricular septal pacing: insights from the pooled clinical evidence.Frontiers in physiology · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsLeft bundle branch pacing is effective for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), but the role of left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) for CRT remains controversial due to lack of LBB capture. We hypothesized that combining LVSP with LV pacing (LVP) may provide additional benefits. METHODS AND
resultsThis prospective observational study enrolled consecutive patients undergoing LVSP for CRT. LVSP was acceptable if paced QRS duration (QRSd)＜130 ms or QRSd reduction ≥ 20%. If neither criterion were met, a CS-LV lead was implanted. Acute hemodynamic response (AHR) represented by LV maximum first derivative (dP/dtmax) was accessed. All patients were followed up for echocardiographic parameters, NT-proBNP levels, NYHA classes, and clinical events. The clinical outcomes included all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and ventricular tachyarrhythmias. A total of 45 patients achieved left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) without confirmed LBB capture were enrolled, including 25 with LVSP alone and 20 with LVSP + LVP. QRSd reduction was significantly greater in LVSP + LVP than LVSP (46.2 ± 19.2 ms vs. 32.6 ± 23.0 ms, P = 0.049). LVSP + LVP resulted in greater improvement in AHR than LVSP (20.0 ± 9.2% vs. 10.4 ± 8.2%, P＜0.001) in 10 patients. After a median follow-up of 26-month, LVEF improvement was significantly higher in LVSP + LVP than LVSP (mean difference: 3.05%; 95% CI: 0.05-6.05; P = 0.047). LVSP + LVP was also independently associated with 87% lower risk of clinical outcomes compared with LVSP [aHR: 0.13 (0.03, 0.62), P = 0.011].
conclusionLVSP combined with LVP might offer greater AHR, electrical resynchronization and as well as improved clinical outcomes than LVSP alone in patients undergoing LBBAP-CRT without LBB capture.
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.