ArticleCJC open2025
Left Bundle Branch Versus Apical Pacing in Atrioventricular Block and Normal Cardiac Function Post-transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: PhysTAVI Trial.
Article in CJC open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04482816 (Randomized Study of Physiological vs Right Ventricular Pacing in Patients With Normal Ventricular Function Post-TAVI), which is not on this 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.
Randomized Study of Physiological vs Right Ventricular Pacing in Patients With Normal Ventricular Function Post-TAVI (PHYS-TAVI Trial)
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
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is currently no evidence of the best pacing mode for high-degree atrioventricular (AV) block occurring after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The objective of this pilot study was to compare a clinical combined endpoint achieved by left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) vs right ventricular (RV) pacing in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) post-TAVI at 12-month follow-up. Methods: Consecutive patients post-TAVI with high-degree AV block and LVEF ≥ 50% were randomized to LBBP or RV pacing. The primary endpoint was survival with an improvement of ≥ 1 point in New York Heart Association functional class or a ≥ 25% increase in distance covered on the 6-minute walking test. Secondary endpoints were change in LVEF, septal flash, mitral regurgitation, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, heart failure hospitalization, score on symptoms, and QRS duration. Results: Twenty-four patients were included in the study, 12 in each arm. Both groups showed a similar incidence of the primary endpoint: 33.3% (n = 4) in the LBBP group vs 25% (n = 3) in the RV group ( Conclusions: Similar midterm outcomes were obtained with LBBP and RV pacing in an elderly population with high-degree AV block and preserved LVEF after TAVI. The pilot Phys-TAVI trial showed the feasibility of LBBP in this population. Larger randomized clinical trials with longer follow-up are needed to test for differential clinical outcomes between pacing modalities. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04482816.
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.