ReviewHerzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie2018
[Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator : Current status and perspectives].
Review in Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The prevalence of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and heart failure patients eligible for remote monitoring in Germany.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death has been proven in numerous randomized trials. By using a totally subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) system, it is expected to ensure appropriate protection while avoiding long-term complications associated with transvenous leads, such as systemic infection and electrode dysfunction. Meanwhile, the safety and effectiveness of the S‑ICD has been substantiated by results of large registry studies. Based on the missing option for ventricular stimulation, corresponding recommendations have been integrated into current guidelines for certain patient populations. In the future, the issue of inadequate shocks caused by oversensing may be solved using advanced screening tools and new detection algorithms. Furthermore, a combination of subcutaneous ICD and LCP (leadless cardiac pacer) seems realistic to enable antibradycardia and antitachycardia ventricular pacing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30306303What 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.