PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 29, 2025European Heart Journal3 citationsOpen Access

Great debate: conduction system pacing will replace conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy

View Full Paper
KVKevin VernooyJJJacqueline JozaMJMarek Jastrzębski

Key Result

Conduction system pacing and biventricular pacing each present distinct pros and cons for cardiac resynchronization therapy, fueling ongoing debate over the optimal approach.

Structured PICO

Does conduction system pacing offer advantages over conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy by biventricular pacing?

I
Intervention
Conduction system pacing
C
Comparator
Conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (biventricular pacing)

This debate article discusses the pros and cons of conduction system pacing versus conventional biventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Abstract

Pros and cons for cardiac resynchronization therapy by biventricular pacing or conduction system pacing.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Vernooy et al. (2025) studied this question. Conduction system pacing and biventricular pacing each present distinct pros and cons for cardiac resynchronization therapy, fueling ongoing debate over the optimal approach.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a5c237aad0d18cf2f1e9489https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf814
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper