ArticleThe British journal of cardiology2026
Transitioning into the new era of conduction system pacing (CSP): a district general hospital experience.
Article in The British journal of 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conduction system pacing (CSP) - encompassing His-bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle-branch area pacing (LBBAP) - delivers more physiological ventricular pacing compared with traditional right ventricular (RV) pacing. It is gaining traction beyond tertiary centres, however, evidence from district general hospitals (DGHs) remains limited. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility, electrical performance, and early clinical outcomes of CSP implemented in a UK DGH. We performed a retrospective single-centre study of consecutive patients who underwent successful CSP at Chesterfield Royal Hospital. HBP implants (n=20) were performed between June 2019 and August 2022; LBBAP implants (n=71) between January 2023 and May 2025. Baseline demographics, procedural metrics, pacing parameters, complications, heart-failure (HF) readmissions, and echocardiographic data to 12 months were obtained from electronic records. Ninety-one patients (mean age 76 ± 10 years; 69% male) received CSP, most commonly for left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) (40%) or anticipated high right-ventricular pacing burden (42%). LBBAP demonstrated lower implant thresholds than HBP (0.92 ± 0.44 V
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.