Heart failure & cardiomyopathiesRandomised controlled trial

His Pacing vs Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

JACC Clin ElectrophysiolPublished

  • randomized trial
  • first randomized European trial
  • crossover at implantation
  • primary analyses by treatment received

Authors' conclusion

No statistically significant difference in long-term performance was detected between His-CRT with low implantation thresholds and BiV-CRT, and echocardiographic response was comparable.

Study context

Population
Patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF), left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%, and left bundle branch blockrandomized, following crossover at implantation, 19 received His-CRT and 31 received BiV-CRT · His-CRT 19 · BiV-CRT 31
Participants
50 patients
Comparison
His-CRT vs BiV-CRT
  • His-CRTn = 19
  • BiV-CRTn = 31

Primary result

As reported in the abstract

Lead revisions · median follow-up 5.3 years (Q1-Q3: 4.6-5.7 years)

P = 0.003

Further findings

Generator replacements · median follow-up 5.3 years (Q1-Q3: 4.6-5.7 years) · more with His-CRT

P = 0.005

Echocardiographic response (≥15% reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume compared with baseline) · comparable

P = 1.0

Reinterventions and threshold development over time, His-CRT with implantation thresholds ≤2.5 V/1 millisecond vs BiV-CRT

no statistically significant differences

All-cause mortality or hospitalization for HF

HR between groups (similar risk; comparator not stated)
HR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.07-1.49; P = 0.147

Original publication

His Pacing vs Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. Published 13 April 2026. doi:10.1016/j.jacep.2026.02.016

Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it