ArticleJournal of cardiovascular electrophysiology2026
Electrophysiologic Assessment of the Successful Left Bundle Branch Pacing Using the Standardized Criteria.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLeft bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is an emerging physiological pacing method that preserves ventricular synchrony. Achieving true LBB capture remains challenging, and the reported success rates vary considerably due to nonuniform definitions. Most previous studies have assessed LBBAP without distinguishing successful left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) from other septal capture patterns. The lack of standardized criteria limits the comparability across studies.
methodsA retrospective cohort study included 407 adult patients undergoing LBBAP implantation between 2019 and 2025. Successful LBBP was defined according to the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) consensus criteria. The success rate of achieving LBBP, electrophysiologic parameters, lead performance over time, and complications were analyzed descriptively, and factors associated with success were analyzed using regression models.
resultsThe overall success rate of achieving LBBP was 85.5%. Diagnostic confirmation primarily relied on QRS morphology transition during threshold testing (87.4%) and shortened V6-LVAT (74.1%). V6-V1 interpeak > 44 ms and potential-stim to V6-LVAT equality was observed in 39.9% and 37.1%, respectively. V6-LVAT and QRS duration were significantly shorter in the successful group (p < 0.001). Lead parameters remained stable in the long term, with low complication rates.
conclusionThe high success rate of achieving LBBP using EHRA criteria highlights the feasibility, safety, and durable performance of LBBAP implantation in routine clinical practice.
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.