ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2026
Cost-effective CRT using dual-chamber generators in patients without atrial pacing need.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves outcomes in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, but device cost limits access. In patients without atrial pacing needs, the atrial port of a dual-chamber pacemaker or ICD can be repurposed for conduction system pacing to deliver CRT. We retrospectively analyzed 18 patients who underwent left bundle branch area pacing using a dual-chamber generator. The left bundle branch lead was connected to the atrial port. Over 12 months, LVEF remained stable in patients with pacemakers, with modest QRS narrowing, and limited ICD data suggested LVEF improvement. No intra-procedural complications occurred, and one patient developed a self-resolving pericardial effusion. No inappropriate ICD therapies were observed. Cost analysis demonstrated savings of $3,922 per CRT-D and $2,963 per CRT-P device avoided. Delivering CRT via dual-chamber generators in patients without atrial pacing needs is feasible, safe, and cost-effective, potentially broadening access to CRT, particularly in resource-limited settings. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41186897What 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.