Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
August 23, 2025EP EuropaceOpen Access

Conduction system pacing versus biventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronization: the CSP-SYNC randomized single center study

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

DŽDavid ŽižekTŽTadej ŽlahtičMMMiha Mrak

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Randomized trial found left bundle branch area pacing improves heart function in heart failure patients, suggesting comparable outcomes to biventricular pacing.

Key Points

  • Left bundle branch area pacing showed a similar improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction compared to biventricular pacing.
  • At 6 months, LBBAP had a 14.0% increase in LVEF, while BiV pacing had an 8.5% increase, indicating LBBAP is noninferior.
  • Patients with heart failure underwent a randomized trial with 62 participants assigned to LBBAP or BiV pacing.
  • Both pacing methods resulted in comparable changes in left ventricular end-systolic volume and heart failure symptoms.

Cite This Study

Žižek et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68af76bf7567bf4f94feffechttps://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euaf192
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Comparison of long-term outcomes of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy with left bundle branch area pacing or biventricular pacing2026
  2. 2Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: How Does It Compare to Biventricular Pacing in Terms of Electrocardiographic Parameters and Procedural Outcomes?2025
  3. 3Comparing left-ventricular-only and biventricular pacing for smarter synchronization2026
  4. 4Comparative outcomes of LBBAP-CRT versus BIV-CRT in a real-world cohort2026
  5. 5Conduction‐System Versus Biventricular Pacing for CRT in HFrEF: Pairwise and Network Meta‐Analysis2026