Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31312871›Full record

ArticleHerz2020

Deactivation of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in patients nearing end of life : Reality or only recommendation?

T Tischer, A Bebersdorf, C Albrecht, J Manhart, A Büttner, A Öner, E Safak, H Ince, J Ortak, E Caglayan

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Herz, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 87% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Cardiologists' perspective on termination of pacemaker therapy-an anonymous survey among cardiologists in Germany.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026
    Article
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

T TischerDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Germany. tina.tischer1@gmx.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2646-0713
A BebersdorfDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
C AlbrechtDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
J ManhartInstitute of Legal Medicine, Rostock University Medical Center, Rostock, Germany.
A BüttnerInstitute of Legal Medicine, Rostock University Medical Center, Rostock, Germany.
A ÖnerDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
E SafakDepartment of Cardiology, Vivantes Klinikum im Friedrichshain und Am Urban, Berlin, Germany.
H InceDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
J OrtakDepartment of Cardiology, Vivantes Klinikum im Friedrichshain und Am Urban, Berlin, Germany.
E CaglayanDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
University of Rostock · DEKlinikum im Friedrichshain · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent guidelines recommend considering deactivation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) in patients nearing death. We evaluated the implementation of this recommendation in unselected deceased individuals with CIEDs.

methodsOver a 7-month period in 2016, all deceased persons taken to the Rostock crematorium were prospectively screened for CIEDs and these were interrogated in situ. Pacing rate, pacing mode, and lead output were documented as well as patient data including location and time of death. In implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), tachycardia therapy adjustment and occurrence of shocks 24 h prior to death were also recorded.

resultsWe examined 2297 subjects, of whom 154 (6.7%) had CIEDs. Of these subjects, 125 (100%) pacemakers (PMs) and 27 (96.4%) ICDs were eligible for analysis. Death in persons with ICDs occurred most frequently in hospital (55.6%), while this was less frequently the case for individuals with PMs (43.2%). Furthermore, 33.3% of subjects with ICDs and 18.5% with PMs died in palliative care units (PCU). Shock therapies were switched off in three (60%) individuals with ICDs who died in the PCU, whereas antibradycardia therapy was not withdrawn in any PM patient in the PCU. Therapy withdrawal occurred in two patients with PMs (1.3%) who died in hospital. Patients with PMs had high ventricular pacing rates at the last interrogation (69 ± 36.0%) and often suffered atrioventricular block (39.2%). Six (25%) of the 24 active ICDs presented shocks near the time of death.

conclusionMany CIED patients died in hospital; nonetheless, in practice, CIED deactivation near death is rarely performed and might be less feasible in subjects with PMs. However, there is still a need to consider deactivation, especially in individuals with ICDs, as one fourth of them received at least one shock within 24 h prior to death.

Indexed as

Defibrillators, ImplantablePacemaker, ArtificialDeathElectronicsHumansPalliative CareDefibrillators, implantableElectric countershockEnd of lifePacemaker, artificialTherapy withdrawal

Identifiers

PMID31312871
OpenAlexW2956642555

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.