Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41117901›Full record

ArticleHerz2025

[Conduction system pacing (CSP) for every patient? : Should CSP replace classical right ventricular and biventricular stimulation?]

Jörn Schmitt, Sergio Richter

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in Herz, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Jörn SchmittAbteilung für Kardiologie, Asklepios Klinik Langen, Röntgenstraße 20, 63225, Langen, Deutschland. jo.schmitt@asklepios.com.
Sergio RichterHerzzentrum Dresden, Universitätsklinikum, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Direct stimulation of the conduction system (conduction system pacing, CSP) can be performed at multiple levels and for different indications. The most physiological option is direct stimulation of the bundle of His, which is technically simpler and possible at the level of the left bundle branch and with more stable electrical parameters. This stimulation results not only in "nice" ECG leads but, above all, in a homogeneous, synchronous, physiological contraction pattern, especially of the left ventricle. In many situations there is a direct competition with the established stimulation modalities of the right ventricle in isolated bradycardia and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in heart failure. A clear distinction and recommendation in the guidelines are not yet definitive, also due to pending and constantly accumulating data and an evolving portfolio of sheaths and leads from all manufacturers; however, overall there is a clear preference for CSP over right ventricular apical pacing, if possible but this still needs to be confirmed in comparison to CRT.

Indexed as

Cardiac Pacing, ArtificialCardiac Resynchronization TherapyHeart Conduction SystemHeart FailureEvidence-Based MedicineHumansTreatment OutcomeCardiac resynchronization therapyHis bundle pacingLeft bundle branch pacingPacemaker-induced cardiomyopathyPhysiological stimulation

Identifiers

PMID41117901
PMCPMC12660346

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.