Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.
Hui-Qiang WeiDepartment of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences) Southern Medical University Guangzhou China.ORCID 0000-0003-0993-3432
Hui LiDepartment of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences) Southern Medical University Guangzhou China.
Hongtao LiaoDepartment of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences) Southern Medical University Guangzhou China.
Yuanhong LiangDepartment of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences) Southern Medical University Guangzhou China.
Qianhuan ZhangDepartment of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences) Southern Medical University Guangzhou China.
Hai DengDepartment of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences) Southern Medical University Guangzhou China.
Wei WeiDepartment of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences) Southern Medical University Guangzhou China.
Zili LiaoDepartment of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences) Southern Medical University Guangzhou China.
Yumei XueDepartment of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences) Southern Medical University Guangzhou China.
Shulin WuDepartment of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences) Southern Medical University Guangzhou China.
Xianhong FangDepartment of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences) Southern Medical University Guangzhou China.ORCID 0000-0002-5290-0954
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
6 · The paper itself
Abstract
backgroundLeft bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is considered to be an alternative modality to deliver cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, left bundle branch pacing and left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) are characterized as left bundle branch area pacing. The long-term effect of only LVSP in patients with a CRT indication is still unknown.
methodsConsecutive patients who met the CRT indication were retrospectively included. LVSP was determined during the procedure. New York Heart Association functional class, NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide), and echocardiographic and pacing parameters were assessed at implant and follow-up visit.
resultsA total of 40 consecutive patients with successful LVSP were included for analysis with a mean follow-up period of 29.4±16.2 months. The QRS complex in lead V
conclusionsLVSP is clinically feasible and safe in patients undergoing CRT. LVSP appears to be an alternative CRT pacing strategy with suboptimal ventricular resynchronization.
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.
Long-Term Impact of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy by Left Ventricular Septal Pacing. · full record | OpenQuestion