Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26822723›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cardiology2016

Considerations for cardiac device lead extraction.

Oussama Wazni, Bruce L Wilkoff

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cardiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Comparing the safety of subcutaneous versus transvenous ICDs: a meta-analysis.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Removal of tine-based leadless pacemakers: insights from a large multicentre experience.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Antegrade approach for peripheral intravascular lithotripsy pretreatment to facilitate laser lead extraction.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Leadless Pacing: Therapy, Challenges and Novelties.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) for the treatment of pacemaker pocket infection in patients unable or unwilling to undergo CIED extraction.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Lead Removal Without Extraction Tools: A Single-Center Experience.Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Oussama WazniDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Main Campus, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio 44195, USA.
Bruce L WilkoffDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Main Campus, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio 44195, USA.
Cleveland Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extraction of cardiovascular implantable electronic device leads is the removal of a lead that has been implanted for >1 year or that requires more than a standard stylet. The number of these procedures has greatly increased over the past few decades owing to the growing demand for primary and secondary implantations in ageing populations, and an accompanying rise in revisions for complications, infections, and lead advisory safety alerts. In this Review, we present the most common indications and techniques used for extraction. Particular consideration is given to the extraction of leads with large vegetations, recalled leads, stented leads, and those placed in the coronary sinus. We also summarize the most relevant and contemporary data on safety, efficacy, and outcomes of lead extraction.

Indexed as

Prosthesis FailureDefibrillators, ImplantableDevice RemovalHumansMedical Device RecallsPacemaker, ArtificialProsthesis DesignProsthesis-Related InfectionsReoperationRisk FactorsTime FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID26822723
OpenAlexW2272282509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.