Key result
Conduction system pacing was associated with a significantly lower risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation compared with right ventricular pacing (RR 0.38; p=0.000).
Why the study?
The comparative effect of conduction system pacing versus right ventricular pacing on the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation remains elusive.
Does conduction system pacing reduce the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation compared with right ventricular pacing in patients requiring pacing therapy?
Meta-Analysis (n=1,577)
Does conduction system pacing reduce the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation compared with right ventricular pacing in patients requiring pacing therapy?
Conduction system pacing is associated with a significantly lower risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation compared to right ventricular pacing, particularly in patients with a ventricular pacing burden ≥20%.
Supports CSP over RVP to lower new-onset AF in paced patients; confirms benefit across pooled studies.
BACKGROUND: Conduction system pacing (CSP) has been reported to improve clinical outcomes in comparison of right ventricular pacing (RVP). However, the performance between CSP and RVP on the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) remains elusive. METHODS: Four online databases were systematically searched up to July 1, 2024. Studies comprising the rate/risk of new-onset AF between CSP and RVP group were included. Subgroup analysis was performed to screen the potential determinants for the new-onset AF risk for CSP therapy. The pooled risk of new-onset AF based on ventricular pacing burden (Vp) between CSP and RVP group were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of six studies including 1577 patients requiring pacing therapy were eligible. The pooled new-onset AF rates for CSP and RVP group were 0.09 and 0.27, respectively. Compared with RVP group, CSP group showed a lower pooled risk (risk ratio [RR] 0.38, p = 0.000) and adjusted risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0.32, p = 0.000) of new-onset AF. Meanwhile, a significant intervention-covariate interaction for the adjusted risk of new-onset AF between CSP and RVP group was identified with Vp < 20% and Vp ≥ 20%. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that CSP is associate with a significantly lower occurrence of new-onset AF compared with RVP. The Vp ≥ 20% may be the key determinant on the lower risk of new-onset AF with CSP therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023492551, identifier (CRD42023492551).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2025) conducted a meta-analysis in patients requiring pacing therapy (n=1,577). Conduction system pacing (CSP) vs. Right ventricular pacing (RVP) was evaluated on new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) (RR 0.38, p=0.000). Conduction system pacing was associated with a significantly lower risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation compared with right ventricular pacing (RR 0.38; p=0.000).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: