ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2026
Cardiac resynchronization in heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction and electrical dyssynchrony without primary indication for pacing: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) and electrical dyssynchrony often experience progressive adverse remodeling, yet current guidelines restrict cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35% or pacing indications. The benefits of CRT or conduction system pacing (CSP) in HFmrEF remain uncertain.
methodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative and single-arm studies involving adults with HFmrEF (LVEF 36%-50%) and no conventional primary pacing indication who underwent de novo CRT or conduction system pacing (CSP). MEDLINE and Embase were searched from inception. For continuous variables, mean differences (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Comparative analyses were performed between CRT/CSP and control groups. For single-arm cohorts, within-patient change from baseline and its standard error were calculated and synthesized as effect estimates relative to zero using generic inverse-variance methods. Random-effects models were used for the primary analyses because of substantial heterogeneity among studies.
resultsSeven studies (one randomized trial, one prospective comparative cohort, and five single-arm cohorts) comprising 311 patients were included. In comparative analyses, no significant difference in LVEF was observed between CRT/CSP and usual care using a random-effects model. Compared with baseline, CRT/CSP was associated with increased LVEF (MD 7.88% points; 95% CI 2.80-12.95; p < 0.01), reduced LV end-diastolic volume (MD 28.97 mL; 95% CI 11.88-46.07; p < 0.01) and LV end-systolic volume (MD 24.19 mL; 95% CI 5.56-42.83; p = 0.01), and decreased LV end-diastolic and end-systolic diameters. Early resynchronization was also associated with improved 6-minute walk distance (MD 68.30 m; 95% CI 43.08-93.53; p < 0.01), lower New York Heart Association class (MD 0.96; 95% CI 0.78-1.13; p < 0.01), narrower QRS duration (MD 40.93 ms; 95% CI 34.65-47.20 p < 0.01), and lower NT-proBNP levels (MD 430.58 pg/mL; 95% CI 298.06-563.11; p < 0.01) at follow-up.
conclusionsIn patients with HFmrEF and electrical dyssynchrony, CRT/CSP was associated with favorable remodeling, functional, electrical, and biomarker changes relative to baseline. However, the available evidence remains limited and largely non-randomized. These findings are hypothesis-generating and should be confirmed in adequately powered randomized trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42189456What 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.