ArticlePacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE2026
Lead-Site Myocardial Scar Predicts Echocardiographic Response to Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing.
Article in Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsAs a novel technique, left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) can achieve excellent resynchronization in heart failure (HF) patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB). This study used cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) to evaluate the scar burden at the lead deployment site and its ability to predict the echocardiographic response. METHODS AND
resultsEighty-seven HF patients with LBBB and a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)≤ 35% who underwent CMR examination and successful LBBAP implantation were retrospectively enrolled. Based on the results of the 6-month echocardiographic assessment after LBBAP, a response was defined as a reduction in the left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) of ≥ 15%, and a super-response was defined as an improvement in the LVEF of ≥ 20% or greater than 50%. The myocardial scar, including global, septum, free wall, lateral and scar around lead deployment sites, was assessed by CMR. LBBAP achieved an 86.2% response rate and a 50.6% super-response rate. Compared with other LGE parameters, a superior negative linear correlation was found between the scar load around lead deployment site and LVESV reduction and improvement in LVEF, indicating that for every 1% increase in the scar burden of the lead deployment site, the delta LVESV decreased by 0.94%, and the delta LVEF decreased by 0.43%. The scar around lead deployment site can strongly predict responders and super-responders [area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC: 0.87 and 0.76), respectively]. In patients with scars around deployment sites > 12.3% (cut-off values based on the Youden's index), the rates of response and super-response decreased substantially to 56.0% and 16.0%, respectively.
conclusionThe scar burden around lead deployment site as assessed by CMR, which is commonly located around the mid anteroseptum, can predict the echocardiographic response. Assessment of myocardial late gadolinium enhancement in the lead deployment site is recommended.
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.