Conduction System Pacing
16
8
11
3
Key Insights
Highlights
Success Rate
100% trial completion (above average)
Clinical Risk Assessment
Based on trial outcomes
Moderate Risk
Score: 50/100
0.0%
0 terminated out of 16 trials
100.0%
+13.5% vs benchmark
0%
0 trials in Phase 3/4
0%
0 of 3 completed with results
Key Signals
Data Visualizations
Phase Distribution
Trial Status
Trial Success Rate
Benchmark: 86.5%
Based on 3 completed trials
Clinical Trials (16)
Conduction System Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy
Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Right Ventricular Pacing in Atrioventricular Block With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Impact of Atrioventricular Delay Optimization on Ventricular Function in Conduction System Pacing
CSP Versus BiVP for Heart Failure Patients With RVP Upgraded to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy
Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing (LBBAP) PMCF Study
PACEVALUE: Development of a Risk Score to Predict Pacing-Induced Cardiomyopathy in Patients Undergoing Pacemaker or ICD Implantation and Evaluation of Patient Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Across Different Healthcare Systems
Physiological Pacing for AV Block to Prevent Pacemaker-induced Cardiomyopathy
Central Haemodynamics and Pacing for AV Block
Study of AHRE Burden in Patients Undergoing Bachmann Bundle Area Pacing and Left Bundle Branch Pacing.
Fluoroless Conduction System Implant
Solutions to the Challenges of Conduction System Pacing
Conduction System Pacing vs Biventricular Resynchronization Therapy in Systolic Dysfunction and Wide QRS: CONSYST-CRT.
Conduction System Pacing Versus Biventricular Resynchronization in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure
Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing in Patients With Heart Failure
LVSP vs RVP in Patients With AV Conduction Disorders
Long-term Outcomes of Conduction System Pacing: a National Multicenter Observational Study - NORMAND'HIS / STIMU'HIS