ArticleHeart and vessels2021
Safe and effective transvenous lead extraction for elderly patients utilizing non-laser and laser tools: a single-center experience in Japan.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Infection Assessment, Diagnosis and Management: A Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Quercetin Inhibits Biofilm Formation by Decreasing the Production of EPS and Altering the Composition of EPS inFrontiers in microbiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) for cardiac implantable electric device (CIED) infection is becoming increasingly common, but is believed to be particularly risky in elderly patients. This study aimed to clarify the safety and effectiveness of TLE in the elderly, evaluating the use of both non-laser and laser extraction tools. We retrospectively analyzed the characteristics, device type, indications, procedures, and clinical results in younger (YG; age: 15-79 years; n = 48) and elderly groups (EG; age: ≥ 80 years; n = 27) of patients who underwent percutaneous TLE between April 2014 and December 2019 at our hospital. The average age was 68 and 88 years in the YG and EG, respectively. Indications for TLE were infection in 33 (68.8%) patients and other in 15 (30.6%) patients in the YG, and infection in all 27 (100%) EG patients. Bloodstream infection was detected in 9 and 4 patients in the YG and EG, respectively, with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis being the most common causative pathogen. All TLE procedures were performed under general anesthesia in an operating room with cardiovascular surgeon backup. An excimer laser sheath (76 leads), a laser followed by a mechanical sheath (45 leads), Evolution RL
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.