ArticleEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2026
Distinct intracardiac electrogram waveforms with perforation during left bundle branch area pacing implantation.
Article in Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Characteristics of paced waveforms and current of injury prior to septal perforation during left bundle branch area pacing.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsPerforation during left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) results in a fall in the current of injury (COI) amplitude in the unipolar unfiltered electrogram (iEGM), but systematic waveform analyses have not been performed. Our aim was to investigate unipolar iEGM waveforms during perforation and to compare them to those at the final lead position. METHODS AND
resultsThe iEGMS of consecutive patients who had perforation during LBBAP implantation were systematically analysed. A total of 92 patients with perforation were included. In the unfiltered channel, sensed COI amplitude was lower with perforation [3.0 (1.5-4.1) mV] than at the final lead position [14.0 (9.2-17.5) mV, P < 0.0001], as was also the case during pacing. Patients with narrow QRS/non-LBBB typically had wide negative (QS) waveforms during sensing (in 67% of cases), whereas those with LBBB/paced rhythm had positive (wide R/RS) morphologies (in 93% of cases). In the former subgroup, a sensed Q or S amplitude > COI amplitude (which is easy to eyeball during lead deployment) had a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 93% for diagnosing perforation. Waveforms during macroperforation (with loss of capture, n = 27) differed compared to microperforation (with preserved capture, n = 65), with significantly lower COI amplitudes, more frequent QS morphology, and rarer sharp multiphasic components in the ventriculogram of the filtered channel.
conclusionBeyond COI amplitude, additional iEGM waveform parameters may be used to evaluate the presence of LBBAP perforation and should be carefully monitored during lead deployment to improve safety.
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.