ArticlePacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE2025
Comparison of Valvular and Ventricular Function After Right Ventricular, Leadless, Deep Septal, and Left Bundle Branch Area Pacemakers.
Article in Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tricuspid Regurgitation After Leadless Pacemaker Implantation: The Role of Atrioventricular Synchrony.Clinical cardiology · 2026Review
- Comparison of Valvular and Ventricular Function After Right Ventricular, Leadless, Deep Septal, and Left Bundle Branch Area Pacemakers.Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionChanges in tricuspid regurgitation (TR), mitral regurgitation (MR), and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are frequently noted after right ventricular apical (RVA) pacemaker implantation but prior studies evaluating whether left bundle branch area (LBBA), deep septal (DS), or leadless pacemaker implantation modify risk for those changes are limited. This study aims to compare changes in TR, MR, and LVEF after implantation of RVA, LBBA, DS, and leadless pacemakers.
methodsPatients were included if they underwent de novo pacemaker implantation for sinus node dysfunction or atrioventricular block and received pre- and post-implant echocardiography. Change in TR, MR, and LVEF were analyzed using post-hoc adjusted Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-squared testing, and multivariable ordinal logistic regression.
resultsAmong 386 consecutive patients (RV, n = 185; LBBA, n = 122; DS, n = 43, leadless, n = 36) the change in TR grade differed between pacemaker types (median [interquartile range] grade change: RVA 0[0,1], leadless 0[0,1], DS 0[0,1], LBBA 0[0,0]; p = 0.01). In multivariable ordinal logistic regression, leadless (OR 2.41, p = 0.01) and DS pacemakers (OR 2.44, p < 0.01) predicted TR worsening compared to LBBA. The change in MR grade also differed between pacemaker types (grade change: RVA 0[0,1], leadless 0[0,1], DS 0[0,0], LBBA 0[-1,0]; p = 0.03). The change in LVEF differed between pacemaker types (LVEF change: RVA -3[-9,3]%, leadless -5[-14,1]%, DS -3[-11,0]%, LBBA -1[-5,5]%; p < 0.01).
conclusionThe change in TR and MR grade and LVEF following pacemaker implant varied by pacemaker type. Compared to implantation with RVA, leadless, and DS pacemakers, LBBA pacemaker implantation was associated with more favorable changes in valvular and ventricular function.
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.