Loading
Life sciences · Interventional Study
ClinicalTrials.gov · September 25, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Interventional Study.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Registry record from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT07842874). This is a study registration, not published results. Lead sponsor: PD Dr. Guram Imnadze. Recruitment status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING. Phase: NA. Study type: INTERVENTIONAL. Enrollment: 124 participants (ESTIMATED). Conditions: Heart Failure, Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing, Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy, Conduction System Pacing. Interventions: DEVICE: LOT-CRT-P (Programming: LBBAP); DEVICE: LOT-CRT-P (Programming: LOT-CRT-P). Primary outcome measures: Clinical Status , From enrollment to 12 month follow up. Brief summary: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has emerged as a promising physiological pacing strategy and may offer advantages over conventional biventricular pacing (BVP), including improved clinical outcomes. However, its effectiveness may be limited in patients with distal conduction system disease, significant endocardial and/or myocardial damage, as well as when direct left bundle branch capture is not achieved. Conventional CRT remains an effective therapy but is associated with procedural challenges and a significant non-responder rate. Current guidelines support the use of LBBAP and BVP either individually or in combination as Left Bundle Branch Optimized CRT (LOT-CRT). Recent data suggest that LOT-CRT may provide superior electrical and hemodynamic resynchronization compared with both LBBAP and BVP. However, there is a lack of randomized trials comparing LBBAP and LOT-CRT in patients with CRT-P indication. The aim of this study is to compare the LOT-CRTP to LBBAP alone.