ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2018
A Contactless Sensor for Pacemaker Pulse Detection: Design Hints and Performance Assessment.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A smart approach to EMG envelope extraction and powerful denoising for human-machine interfaces.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Comparation of quality of life in Chinese patients undergoing leadless versus conventional pacemaker implantation.Clinical cardiology · 2023Article
- Contactless Electrocatheter Tracing within Human Body via Magnetic Sensing: A Feasibility Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Effectiveness and Safety in Remote Monitoring of Patients with Pacemakers Five Years after an Implant: The Poniente Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Wearable Device to Monitor Back Movements Using an Inductive Textile Sensor.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Continuous monitoring of pacemaker activity can provide valuable information to improve patients' follow-up. Concise information is stored in some types of pacemakers, whereas ECG can provide more detailed information, but requires electrodes and cannot be used for continuous monitoring. This study highlights the possibility of a continuous monitoring of pacemaker pulses by sensing magnetic field variations due to the current pulses. This can be achieved by means of a sensor coil positioned near the patient's thorax without any need for physical contact. A simplified model of coil response to pacemaker pulses is presented in this paper, along with circuits suitable for pulse detection. In vitro tests were carried out using real pacemakers immersed in saline solution; experimental data were used to assess the accuracy of the model and to evaluate the sensor performance. It was found that the coil signal amplitude decreases with increasing distance from the pacemaker lead wire. The sensor was able to easily perform pacemaker spike detection up to a distance of 12 cm from the pacemaker leads. The stimulation rate can be measured in real time with high accuracy. Since any electromagnetic pulse triggers the same coil response, EMI may corrupt sensor measurements and thus should be discriminated.
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.