Updated Meta‐Analysis of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Right Ventricular Pacing in Conduction System Disorders: Insights From New Evidence

INTRODUCTION: Right ventricular pacing (RVP) has long been the standard therapy for bradyarrhythmias but may induce ventricular dyssynchrony and adverse cardiac remodeling. Physiologic pacing strategies that preserve the native conduction system, particularly left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), have emerged as promising alternatives. This study aimed to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of LBBAP versus RVP through an updated meta-analysis. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for relevant studies published through June 2025. Studies comparing LBBAP and RVP in patients undergoing pacemaker implantation were included. Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects models. RESULTS: A total of 40 studies comprising 8290 patients were included. LBBAP was associated with significantly shorter QRS duration compared with RVP (30 studies, n = 5510; MD -35.56 ms, 95% CI -41.88 to -29.24; p < 0.0001). Structural remodeling also favored LBBAP, with greater improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (16 studies, n = 1693; MD +3.77%, 95% CI 2.43-5.12; p < 0.0001) and greater reduction in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (13 studies, n = 1666; MD -2.33 mm, 95% CI -3.59 to -1.07; p < 0.0001). Clinically, LBBAP was associated with lower heart failure hospitalization (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.29-0.52; p < 0.0001) and reduced all-cause mortality (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.72; p < 0.0001), along with greater reduction in NT-proBNP levels. CONCLUSION: LBBAP provides superior electrical synchrony, improved cardiac remodeling, and favorable clinical outcomes compared with RVP, while maintaining a comparable procedural safety profile.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical Cardiology
Published
2026-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.70278
Primary Topic
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Updated Meta‐Analysis of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Right Ventricular Pacing in Conduction System Disorders: Insights From New Evidence

Amina Akram, Zulfiqar Qutrio Baloch, Ghazal Ishaque, Hamza Ali Danish et al.
Clinical Cardiology
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
article

Updated Meta‐Analysis of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Right Ventricular Pacing in Conduction System Disorders: Insights From New Evidence

Amina Akram, Zulfiqar Qutrio Baloch, Ghazal Ishaque, Hamza Ali Danish, Supratik Rayamajhi, Rehan Ishaque, Amna Ikram, George S. Abela, F. N. U. Reya
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Right ventricular pacing (RVP) has long been the standard therapy for bradyarrhythmias but may induce ventricular dyssynchrony and adverse cardiac remodeling. Physiologic pacing strategies that preserve the native conduction system, particularly left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), have emerged as promising alternatives. This study aimed to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of LBBAP versus RVP through an updated meta-analysis. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for relevant studies published through June 2025. Studies comparing LBBAP and RVP in patients undergoing pacemaker implantation were included. Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects models. RESULTS: A total of 40 studies comprising 8290 patients were included. LBBAP was associated with significantly shorter QRS duration compared with RVP (30 studies, n = 5510; MD -35.56 ms, 95% CI -41.88 to -29.24; p < 0.0001). Structural remodeling also favored LBBAP, with greater improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (16 studies, n = 1693; MD +3.77%, 95% CI 2.43-5.12; p < 0.0001) and greater reduction in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (13 studies, n = 1666; MD -2.33 mm, 95% CI -3.59 to -1.07; p < 0.0001). Clinically, LBBAP was associated with lower heart failure hospitalization (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.29-0.52; p < 0.0001) and reduced all-cause mortality (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.72; p < 0.0001), along with greater reduction in NT-proBNP levels. CONCLUSION: LBBAP provides superior electrical synchrony, improved cardiac remodeling, and favorable clinical outcomes compared with RVP, while maintaining a comparable procedural safety profile.

Clinical CardiologyVol. 49(4)
Liaquat University of Medical & Health Sciences (PK), Mayo Clinic (US), Fatima Jinnah Medical University (PK), Maharaja Krishna Chandra Gajapati Medical College and Hospital (IN), Bartlett Regional Hospital (US), Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Medical University (PK), MRF Geosystems (Canada) (CA), Bartlett Public Library District (US), Michigan State University (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 22%
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.