Cardiac Resynchronisation with Conduction System Pacing
Why the study?
BiVP is non-physiological and up to one-third of eligible patients with heart failure do not derive benefit, leading to conduction system pacing emerging as an alternative for cardiac resynchronisation.
Does conduction system pacing improve outcomes compared to biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure eligible for cardiac resynchronisation therapy?
Comparison
Conduction system pacing vs biventricular pacing
Design
Review
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Does not support changing to conduction system pacing in CRT yet; leaves open need for randomized outcome trials versus biventricular pacing.
Structured PICO
Does conduction system pacing improve outcomes compared to biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure eligible for cardiac resynchronisation therapy?
P
Population
Patients with heart failure who are eligible for cardiac resynchronisation therapy
I
Intervention
Conduction system pacing (CSP), including His bundle pacing and left bundle branch area pacing
C
Comparator
Biventricular pacing (BiVP)
O
Outcome
Options and outcomes of CSP when used for cardiac resynchronisation
Conduction system pacing is emerging as a physiological alternative to biventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronisation in heart failure patients.
Cite This Study
Ezzeddine et al. (2023) studied this question.