Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42085561›Full record

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

Optimal pace timing for left bundle branch area pacing with or without an additional LV lead: results from the CSPOT study.

Robert D Schaller, Paul Foley, Badrinathan Chandrasekaran, Jonathan Lyne, Marek Jastrzębski, Pugazhendhi Vijayaraman, Gaurav A Upadhyay, Rafał Gardas, Travis Richardson, D'Anne Kudlik and 7 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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. It is linked to trial NCT04905290 (Conduction System Pacing Optimized Therapy Study), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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.

NCT04905290 nacompletednot on this map

Conduction System Pacing Optimized Therapy Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorMedtronic Cardiac Rhythm and Heart FailureRan2021 to 2023Enrolled60ConditionsHeart FailureArmsLeft ventricular coronary sinus (BiV) configuration, Conduction system pacing-only configuration, Conduction System Pacing Optimized Therapy (CSPOT) configuration
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Robert D SchallerSection of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8608-7247
Paul FoleyWiltshire Cardiac Center, Great Western Hospital, Swindon, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4856-832X
Badrinathan ChandrasekaranWiltshire Cardiac Center, Great Western Hospital, Swindon, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2265-0501
Jonathan LyneDivision of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Beacon Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-0257-8629
Marek JastrzębskiFirst Department of Cardiology, Interventional Electrocardiology and Hypertension, Jagiellonian University, Medical College, Krakow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-3318-6601
Pugazhendhi VijayaramanGeisinger Heart Institute, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2230-100X
Gaurav A UpadhyayCenter for Arrhythmia Care, Section of Cardiology, University of Chicago, Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3493-2100
Rafał GardasDepartment of Electrocardiology and Heart Failure, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-0002-1955
Travis RichardsonDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9772-0308
D'Anne KudlikMedtronic, Mounds View, MN, USA.ORCID 0009-0007-2869-8382
Robert W StadlerMedtronic, Mounds View, MN, USA.
Patrick ZimmermanMedtronic, Mounds View, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6233-0385
James BurrellMedtronic, Mounds View, MN, USA.ORCID 0009-0000-1022-8998
Robert WaxmanMedtronic, Mounds View, MN, USA.ORCID 0009-0006-2790-2305
Richard N CornelussenMedtronic, Bakken Research Center, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6504-3314
Bengt HerwegDivision of Cardiology, University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine and Tampa General Hospital, Tampa, FL, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8645-4817
Zachary WhinnettNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2775-5126

Funding

Medtronic
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThis study aimed to determine optimal atrioventricular (AV) timing for left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) and optimal AV and interventricular (VV) timing for LBBAP optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy (LOT-CRT) to enhance the benefit of conduction system pacing. METHODS AND

resultsAcute measurements of LV dP/dtmax and QRS duration were collected during sweeps of AV and VV delays during paired comparison of LBBAP, LOT-CRT, and biventricular pacing (BVP) in 48 CRT-indicated patients. Optimal AV delays were selected as the vertex of a parabolic model fit to the AV sweep results, obtained independently for LV dP/dtmax and QRS duration. LBBAP, LOT-CRT, and BVP were similarly sensitive to the choice of AV delay, and 60 ms deviations from optimal AV delay resulted in an approximately 30% reduction in the haemodynamic benefits of resynchronization. Based upon LV dP/dtmax measurements, the average optimal paced AV (PAV) for LBBAP (152 ms) was significantly shorter than that for LOT-CRT (171 ms, P < 0.01) or BVP (167 ms, P = 0.01). Based upon QRS duration, the average optimal PAV for LBBAP (164 ms) was similar to that for LOT-CRT (160 ms, P = 0.52) or BVP (165 ms, P = 0.95). For each resynchronization modality, a linear regression between the patient's measured intrinsic AV conduction and their optimal AV delay provided a patient-specific AV delay, resulting in improved AV selection compared to applying a fixed AV delay to all patients. Finally, simultaneous activation (VV = 0) was best for both LOT-CRT and BVP.

conclusionLBBAP, LOT-CRT, and BVP are similarly sensitive to AV-timing. Optimal AV delay is linearly related to intrinsic AV for each resynchronization modality. For LOT-CRT and BVP, simultaneous biventricular activation is best on average. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04905290.

Indexed as

Bundle-Branch BlockBundle of HisCardiac Resynchronization TherapyCardiac Resynchronization Therapy DevicesHeart FailureVentricular Function, LeftAction PotentialsAgedElectrocardiographyFemaleHeart RateHumansMaleMiddle AgedTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeAV delaycardiac resynchronization therapyLeft bundle branch area pacingLeft bundle branch area pacing-optimized cardiac resynchronization therapyVV delay

Identifiers

PMID42085561
PMCPMC13197835

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.