ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2026
Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing in Heart Failure: A Physiological Alternative to Conventional Biventricular Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy and a Step Towards Personalized Device Therapy.
Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heart failure remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality despite advances in guideline-directed medical therapy and device-based treatment. Cardiac resynchronization therapy delivered by conventional biventricular pacing constitutes an established therapeutic strategy for selected patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and electrical desynchrony. Left bundle branch area pacing has emerged as a physiological pacing strategy that directly engages the conduction system, providing more effective electrical and mechanical resynchronization. Current evidence from observational studies, randomized pilot trials, and recent multicentre data suggest that left bundle branch pacing may achieve greater QRS narrowing, more favourable pacing thresholds, improved left ventricular ejection fraction, and reduced heart failure hospitalizations compared with conventional biventricular pacing in selected patients. This review summarizes the rationale, implantation criteria, patient selection, and current clinical evidence supporting left bundle branch pacing as an alternative pacing modality in heart failure patients. Despite encouraging available data, larger randomized trials with longer follow-up and broader patient populations are required to clarify long-term safety and to determine whether left bundle branch pacing should be adopted as a routine alternative to conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy. From a personalized medicine perspective, the choice between conduction system pacing and conventional biventricular pacing should be guided by individual patient characteristics, including conduction phenotype, QRS morphology and duration, myocardial scar burden, heart failure aetiology, coronary venous anatomy, and the chance of achieving confirmed conduction-system capture. This review therefore renders left bundle branch pacing within an individualized, phenotype-guided resynchronization strategy rather than as a universal replacement for biventricular pacing.
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.