ArticleClinical cardiology2026
Strauss-Defined LBBB Identifies Patients With Improved Outcomes After CRT-D: A Comparative Cohort Study.
Article in Clinical cardiology, 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLeft bundle branch block (LBBB) is a well-established predictor of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. However, several electrocardiographic definitions are used, and their relative significance remains unclear. HYPOTHESIS: Stricter electrocardiographic definitions of LBBB are associated with improved response to CRT and more favorable clinical outcomes.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study including 109 patients who underwent CRT-defibrillator implantation. Baseline electrocardiograms were classified according to six commonly used LBBB definitions. The primary endpoint was echocardiographic response at 6 months, defined as a ≥ 10% absolute increase in left ventricular ejection fraction or a ≥ 15% reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume. Secondary endpoints included heart failure hospitalization and all-cause mortality. Multivariable logistic, Cox, and negative binomial regression models were used, with odds ratios (OR), hazard ratios (HR), incidence rate ratios (IRR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
resultsStrauss-defined LBBB was independently associated with echocardiographic response (adjusted OR, 7.47; 95% CI, 2.52-25.0; p < 0.001) and showed the highest discriminative performance (area under the curve, 0.728; 95% CI, 0.643-0.814). Strauss was also associated with lower heart failure hospitalization rates (adjusted IRR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.13-0.64; p = 0.002) and reduced mortality (adjusted HR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.02-0.99; p = 0.049). Median follow-up was 30 months (IQR 14-60).
conclusionsDifferent LBBB definitions are associated with differences in CRT response and outcomes. Stricter criteria appear to better identify patients more likely to respond, with more favorable outcomes. These findings may help refine patient selection for CRT.
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.