ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2026
Assessing modified chest leads as a substitute for electrophysiological systems in left bundle branch area pacing.
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
Abstract
backgroundLeft bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) typically requires an electrophysiological (EP) system, but access to these systems is limited in many catheterization laboratories. Modified chest leads (MCL1 and MCL6) are commonly used as substitutes for V1 and V6, yet their feasibility as an alternative during LBBAP implantation remains unclear. This study evaluates the utility of MCL-based recordings from a pacing system analyzer (PSA) compared to conventional EP system recordings.
methodsThis prospective study included all patients undergoing de novo transvenous permanent pacemaker implantation with an expected ventricular pacing burden ≥ 20%. Continuous 12-lead ECG-based EP system recordings were compared with MCL recordings from a PSA. Parameters analyzed included right bundle branch block (RBBB) morphology, QRS transition, left ventricular activation time (LVAT), interpeak interval (V6-V1/MCL6-MCL1), and QRS duration.
resultsA total of 73 patients (32 men, age 74.3 ± 10.8 years) were included. LBBAP was successfully achieved in all patients. RBBB morphology and QRS transition showed 100% concordance between MCL leads and the EP system. QRS duration (130.63 ± 13.88 ms vs. 124.1 ± 12.04 ms) and LVAT (73.71 ± 9.61 ms vs. 67.08 ± 9.2 ms) were slightly prolonged in MCL measurements but showed minimal bias in Bland-Altman analysis. Intraclass correlation coefficients confirmed strong agreement for QRS duration (0.849), LVAT (0.850), and interpeak interval (0.813).
conclusionMCL-based monitoring closely correlates with the EP system and may serve as a practical and reliable alternative to the EP system, particularly in resource-limited settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41258272What 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.