Prospective randomized trial of conduction system pacing vs right ventricular pacing for patients with atrioventricular block, Prague CSP trial

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F68081731%3A_____%2F25%3A00640289" target="_blank" >RIV/68081731:_____/25:00640289 - isvavai.cz</a>

Alternative codes found

RIV/00159816:_____/25:00082371 RIV/27283933:_____/25:N0000024

Result on the web

<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1547527125024658" target="_blank" >https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1547527125024658</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2025.05.036" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.hrthm.2025.05.036</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

Prospective randomized trial of conduction system pacing vs right ventricular pacing for patients with atrioventricular block, Prague CSP trial

Original language description

Background Conduction system pacing (CSP) replaces right ventricular pacing (RVP) in bradycardia patients. Objective To compare CSP vs RVP in patients with pacemaker indication due to atrioventricular conduction disease. Methods This study randomized patients to CSP or RVP in 1:1 ratio and followed them for 12 months. CSP received either His bundle pacing or left bundle branch area pacing, The primary end point was a change in the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). The combined composite clinical end point consisted of cardiovascular death, cardiac resynchronization therapy upgrade, or hospitalization for heart failure. Results Of 249 patients, 125 were randomized to RVP and 124 to CSP, there were no differences between clinical parameters. In CSP, 10 patients received His bundle pacing, 96 left bundle branch area pacing, 15 deep septal pacing, and 3 RVP. Procedural and fluoroscopy times were longer in CSP vs RVP (63 vs 40 and 7 vs 3 minutes, P < .001). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the LVEF decline in CSP was smaller than RVP (-2% vs4%, P = .03), and a LVEF decrease >= 10% occurred more often in RVP 19 (16%) than CSP 6 (5%), P = .01. There was no difference in the composite clinical outcome between RVP and CSP (9 vs 4, P = .15). There was also no difference in procedural complications (9 in RVP vs 2 in CSP, P = .09). Conclusion In patients with severe conduction disease, CSP led to a smaller LVEF decline than RVP after 1 year of pacing. Both pacing methods had similar rates of clinical end points and procedural complications.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_imp - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

30201 - Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems

Project

<a href="/en/project/NU21-02-00584" target="_blank" >NU21-02-00584: Ultra-high-frequency ECG for prediction of adverse left ventricular remodeling in permanent right ventricular pacing</a><br>

Continuities

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Publication year

2025

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

Heart Rhythm

ISSN

1547-5271

e-ISSN

1556-3871

Volume of the periodical

22

Issue of the periodical within the volume

10

Country of publishing house

US - UNITED STATES

Number of pages

9

Pages from-to

"e894"-"e902"

UT code for WoS article

001589506000001

EID of the result in the Scopus database

2-s2.0-105008527831