Key result
Chronic epicardial left ventricular pacing preserved left ventricular function in children, resulting in a significantly higher shortening fraction (32.2%) compared to right ventricular pacing (21.7%).
Why the study?
Does chronic epicardial left ventricular pacing preserve left ventricular function compared to right ventricular pacing in children?
Cohort (n=32)
Single-blind
No
Does chronic epicardial left ventricular pacing preserve left ventricular function compared to right ventricular pacing in children?
Absolute Event Rate: 32.2% vs 21.7%
p-value: p=<0.05
Chronic epicardial left ventricular pacing preserves left ventricular function and avoids mechanical dyssynchrony compared to right ventricular pacing in children.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
May support LV epicardial pacing consideration in children; leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
Geldorp et al. (2008) conducted a cohort in Congenital or acquired atrioventricular block (n=32). Chronic epicardial left ventricular pacing vs. Chronic right ventricular pacing was evaluated on Shortening fraction (p=<0.05). Chronic epicardial left ventricular pacing preserved left ventricular function in children, resulting in a significantly higher shortening fraction (32.2%) compared to right ventricular pacing (21.7%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: