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.
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.
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.
Conduction System Pacing Optimized Therapy Study
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
17 authors.
Funding
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
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.