ArticlePloS one2016
Clinical, Echocardiographic, and Electrocardiographic Predictors of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation after Dual-Chamber Pacemaker Implantation: An Integrated Scoring Model Approach.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF) predictors after dual-chamber pacemaker (PM) implantation remain unclear. We sought to determine these predictors and establish an integrated scoring model. Data were retrospectively reviewed for 649 patients (63.8 ± 12.3 years, 48.6% male, mean CHA2DS2-VASC score 2.7 ± 2.0) undergoing dual-chamber PM implantation. PeAF was defined as documented AF on two consecutive electrocardiograms acquired ≥7 days apart. During a 7.1-year median follow-up (interquartile range 4.5-10.1 years), 67 (10.3%) patients had PeAF. Multivariable analysis showed the following independent predictors of future PeAF: ischemic stroke or transient ischemic accident history (hazard ratio [HR] 2.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-3.50, p = 0.040), atrial fibrillation/flutter history (HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.01-3.20, p = 0.046), sinus node disease (HR 2.24, 95% CI 1.16-4.35, p = 0.016), left atrial enlargement (>45 mm, HR 2.14, 95% CI 1.26-3.63, p = 0.005), and time in automatic mode switching >1% at first follow-up interrogation (HR 2.58, 95% CI 1.51-4.42, p < 0.001). An integrated scoring model combining these predictors showed good discrimination performance at the seven-year follow-up. (C-statistic 0.716, 95% CI 0.629-0.802, p < 0.001). Significantly greater seven-year PeAF incidences were seen in patients with higher scores (2-5) than in those with lower scores (0-1) (22.8% ± 3.8% vs. 5.3% ± 1.7%, p < 0.001). In conclusion, an integrated scoring model combining clinical, echocardiographic, and electrocardiographic characteristics is useful for predicting future PeAF in patients with a dual-chamber PM.
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.