ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Preserves Mechanical Strain and Synchrony Compared to Right Ventricular Apical Pacing in an Acute Paired Preclinical Model.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background -: Left bundle branch area (LBBA) pacing is emerging as a promising alternative to conventional right ventricular (RV) pacing, particularly in its ability to maintain physiological ventricular activation and enhance cardiac function. However, the effect of LBBA pacing on changes to left ventricular (LV) function in paired experiments on healthy hearts, particularly in relation to myocardial strain and time to peak systolic strain difference (TPSD), which are critical indicators of LV dysfunction, remains inadequately understood. Objective –: To investigate how the LV myocardial strain and TPSD change in a comparative study of LBBA pacing versus conventional RV apex pacing in the same hearts under normal physiological conditions. Methods –: Pre-clinical canine models (n=7) were implanted with pacing leads in the LBBA and RV apex. Functional parameters were assessed under acute pacing conditions and during sinus rhythm (SR) with echocardiographic assessment. Results –: Results demonstrated that LBBA pacing significantly improved global longitudinal strain (GLS: -13±2% vs. -9±2%, p = 0.0003) and global circumferential strain (GCS: -16±3% vs. -10±4%, p = 0.0119) compared to RV apical pacing. TPSD was significantly greater with RV pacing (65±10 ms vs. 24±7 ms, p = 0.0024). Compared with SR data, LBBA pacing showed no significant changes in GLS, GCS, or TPSD. Conclusion –: These findings suggest that LBBA pacing effectively preserves global myocardial strain and TPSD close to their values in SR, thereby contributing to enhanced overall LV function, as evidenced by improvements in ejection fraction, end-systolic volume, and end-diastolic volume.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.