Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30255304›Full record

ReviewHerz2018

Leadless pacing.

J Sperzel, C Hamm, A Hain

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Herz, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

J SperzelHerzzentrum, Kerckhoff-Klinik GmbH, Bad Nauheim, Germany. j.sperzel@kerckhoff-klinik.de.
C HammHerzzentrum, Kerckhoff-Klinik GmbH, Bad Nauheim, Germany.
A HainHerzzentrum, Kerckhoff-Klinik GmbH, Bad Nauheim, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Leadless self-contained intracardiac pacemakers were developed with the aim of abolishing the short- and long-term risk of lead- and pocket-related complications associated with transvenous devices. Leadless pacemakers promise minimally invasive procedures, long battery lives, and small amounts of foreign materials in the body. Experiences with the pioneering single-chamber devices have provided reasons for optimism about the future of the leadless concept. In the future, as more patients receive and live longer with implantable devices, the total risk of procedure- and lead-related complications is expected to increase, adding a sense of urgency to the need for leadless alternatives to transvenous pacemakers. This review surveys the performance of currently available leadless pacemakers as well as emerging new innovative adaptations and applications of the leadless concept.

Indexed as

Arrhythmias, CardiacCardiac Pacing, ArtificialPacemaker, ArtificialEquipment DesignForeign BodiesHumansCardiac resynchronization therapyDual-chamber pacingImplantable cardioverter-defibrillatorPacemakerSingle-chamber pacing

Identifiers

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.