ArticleArrhythmia & electrophysiology review2016
Pacing and Defibrillators in Complex Congenital Heart Disease.
Article in Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Superior vena cava perforation during atrial lead implantation in a patient with repaired tetralogy of Fallot: a case report.European heart journal. Case reports · 2026Article
- Advancements in pacing and ICD technologies: Potential implications for complex congenital heart disease in adults.International journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease · 2026Review
- Combined Lead Extraction and Leadless VDD Pacemaker Implantation in d-TGA Patient After Senning Procedure.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
- Potential applications of ultrasound-based leadless endocardial pacing in adult congenital heart disease.Heart rhythm · 2025Article
- Dual-chamber leadless pacemaker in complex adult congenital heart disease: a case report.European heart journal. Case reports · 2024Article
- Pediatric Epicardial Devices: Early and Midterm Outcomes.World journal for pediatric & congenital heart surgery · 2023Article
- Angiography-guided mid/high septal implantation of ventricular leads in patients with congenital heart disease.Journal of arrhythmia · 2021Article
- Acute and Long-Term Outcomes of Transvenous Cardiac Pacing Device Implantation in Patients With Congenital Heart Disease.Circulation reports · 2019Article
- Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in congenital heart disease.Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2016Review
- Retrievable dual-chamber leadless pacemaker implant (Aveir DR) in an adult patient with congenital heart disease.Indian pacing and electrophysiology journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Device therapy in the complex congenital heart disease (CHD) population is a challenging field. There is a myriad of devices available, but none designed specifically for the CHD patient group, and a scarcity of prospective studies to guide best practice. Baseline cardiac anatomy, prior surgical and interventional procedures, existing tachyarrhythmias and the requirement for future intervention all play a substantial role in decision making. For both pacing systems and implantable cardioverter defibrillators, numerous factors impact on the merits of system location (endovascular versus non-endovascular), lead positioning, device selection and device programming. For those with Fontan circulation and following the atrial switch procedure there are also very specific considerations regarding access and potential complications. This review discusses the published guidelines, device indications and the best available evidence for guidance of device implantation in the complex CHD population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.