ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2022
Benefits of cardiac pacing in ICD recipients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2022. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Device-Related Complications and Inappropriate Therapies Among Subcutaneous vs. Transvenous Implantable Defibrillator Recipients: Insight Monaldi Rhythm Registry.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeImplantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) is the only definitive therapy for prevention of sudden cardiac death in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Conventional transvenous ICDs can provide cardiac pacing unlike new subcutaneous ICD, but the usefulness of cardiac pacing in HCM patients is not well defined. We sought to assess the usefulness of ICD pacing in HCM.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 93 HCM patients who had undergone ICD implantation at our center. Usefulness of pacing was defined as follows: 1) need of pacing due to bradycardia or AV conduction disturbances, 2) improvement of LV outflow tract obstruction by sequential AV pacing, 3) need for CRT pacing, or 4) successful antitachycardia pacing without a subsequent shock. Independent predictors of useful pacing were investigated by multivariable analysis.
resultsDuring a mean follow-up of 91.3 ± 5.5 months, 43 patients (46.2%) reached the composite endpoint. Independent predictors of pacing usefulness were older age (HR 1.36; 95%CI: 1.088-1.709; p=0.007) and NYHA functional class ≥ II (HR 2.15; 95%CI: 1.083-4.301; p=0.029). Twenty-eight (30.1%) patients had appropriate ICD interventions, triggered by a monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (MVT) in 22 of them (78.5%). In 17 individuals with MVT (77%), antitachycardia pacing successfully treated MVT.
conclusionsIn our HCM series of patients with ICD, 46% of individuals benefitted from cardiac pacing. MVT were documented in nearly 80% of the patients with ventricular arrhythmias and antitachycardia pacing successfully treated them in 77% of cases.
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.