ArticleHeart rhythm O22020
Risk of COVID-19 infection after cardiac electrophysiology procedures.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2020. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, attempts to conserve resources and limit virus spread have resulted in delay of nonemergent procedures across all medical specialties, including cardiac electrophysiology (EP). Many patients have delayed care and continue to express concerns about potential nosocomial spread of coronavirus.
objectiveTo quantify risk of development of COVID-19 owing to in-hospital transmission related to an EP procedure, in the setting of preventive measures instituted in our laboratory areas.
methodsWe contacted patients by telephone who underwent emergent procedures in the electrophysiology lab during the COVID-19 surge at our hospital (March 16, 2020, to May 15, 2020, reaching daily census 450 COVID-19 patients,) ≥2 weeks after the procedure, to assess for symptoms of and/or testing for COVID-19, and assessed outcomes from medical record review.
resultsOf the 124 patients undergoing EP procedures in this period, none had developed documented or suspected coronavirus infection. Seven patients described symptoms of chest pain, dyspnea, or fever; 3 were tested for coronavirus and found to be negative. Of the remaining 4, 2 had a more plausible alternative explanation for the symptoms, and 2 had transient symptoms not meeting published criteria for probable COVID-19 infection.
conclusionDespite a high hospital census of COVID-19 patients during the period of hospital stay for an EP procedure, there were no likely COVID-19 infections occurring in follow-up of at least 2 weeks. With proper use of preventive measures as recommended by published guidelines, the risk of nosocomial spread of COVID-19 to patients in the EP lab is low.
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.