Arrhythmias & electrophysiology
Comparison of Pacing Lead Design on Left Bundle Branch Pacing Outcomes: LEAD-LBBP Randomized Clinical Trial
Primary result · Incidence of LLCResult — go to the resultHazard ratio 2.72 95% CI 1.34–5.54Authors' conclusion
Among LBBP recipients, SDL compared with LLL resulted in a higher incidence of LLC during follow-up, lower acute LBBP procedural success, and greater acute lead damage during implantation. These findings have significant implications for lead selection in LBBP.(Comparison of Pacing Lead Design on Left Bundle Branch Pacing Outcomes: The LEAD_LBBP Randomized Clinical Trial [LEAD-LBBP]; NCT06318130).
Study context
- Population
- Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) recipientsmean age 74.9 ± 9.6 years, 97 [44%] female
- Participants
- 226 recipients
- Comparison
- LLL or SDL
- LLLn = 113reference
- SDLn = 113
- Primary endpoint
- Incidence of LLC
- Follow-up
- 12 months
Methodological detailsblock randomization in a 1:1 ratio
- Block randomization in a 1:1 ratio
Primary result
Incidence of LLC
Hazard ratio
2.72
95% CI 1.34–5.54
P = 0.006
By group
SDL vs LLL
HR 2.72 (95% CI 1.34–5.54); P = 0.006
As reported in the abstract
- LLC overall
- 36 (16%)
Secondary outcomes
Acute LBBP success
- Acute LBBP success: P = 0.007
Pacing parameters and clinical outcomes
- Comparable between the SDL and LLL groups
- P > 0.05
Safety
| Outcome | SDL | LLL | OR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acute lead damage | 10% | 3% | 3.95 (1.07–14.58) | P = 0.027 | |
| 0.050.21520Odds ratio (log scale) |
Overall complications
- Comparable between the SDL and LLL groups
- P > 0.05
Original publication
Comparison of Pacing Lead Design on Left Bundle Branch Pacing Outcomes: LEAD-LBBP Randomized Clinical Trial. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. Published 27 June 2026. doi:10.
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it