Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34031214›Full record

ArticleOpen heart2021

Access to MRI for patients with cardiac pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators.

Christopher Pieri, Anish Bhuva, Russell Moralee, Aderonke Abiodun, Deepa Gopalan, Giles H Roditi, James C Moon, Charlotte Manisty

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Open heart, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Christopher PieriInstitute of Health Sciences, Queen Mary University of London Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1274-2349
Anish BhuvaDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Russell MoraleeDepartment of Radiology, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Aderonke AbiodunDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Deepa GopalanDepartment of Radiology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Giles H RoditiDepartment of Cardiovascular Imaging, Barts Heart Centre, London, Greater London, UK.
James C MoonDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Charlotte ManistyDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK c.manisty@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-0245-7090
Barts Health NHS Trust · GBBritish Heart Foundation · GBImperial College London · GBQueen Mary University of London · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/16/46/32187British Heart Foundation FS/CRTF/21/24134
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine provision of MRI for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs; pacemakers and defibrillators) in England, to understand regional variation and assess the impact of guideline changes.

methodsRetrospective data related to MRI scans performed in patients with CIED over the preceding 12 months was collected using a structured survey tool distributed to every National Health Service Trust MRI unit in England. Data were compared with similar data from 2014/2015 and with demand (estimated from local CIED implantation rates and regional population data by sustainability and transformation partnerships (STPs)).

resultsResponses were received from 212 of 223 (95%) hospitals in England. 112 (53%) MRI units' scan patients with MR-conditional CIEDs (10% also scan non-MR conditional devices), compared with 46% of sites in 2014/2015. Total annual scan volume increased over fourfold between 2014 and 2019 (1090 to 4896 scans). There was widespread geographical variation, with five STPs (total population >3·5 million representing approximately 25 000 patients with CIED) with no local provision. There was no correlation between local demand (CIED implantation rates) and MRI provision (scan volume). Complication rates were extremely low with three events nationally in 12 months (0·06% CIED-MRI scans).

conclusionsProvision of MRI for patients with CIEDs in England increased over fourfold in 4 years, but an estimated 10-fold care gap remains. Almost half of hospitals and 1 in 10 STPs have no service, with no relationship between local supply and demand. Availability of MRI for patients with non-MR conditional devices, although demonstrably safe, remains limited.

Indexed as

Defibrillators, ImplantablePacemaker, ArtificialEnglandFollow-Up StudiesHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPatient SafetyRetrospective StudiesSurveys and Questionnairesartificialdefibrillatorsdiagnostic imagingimplantablemagnetic resonance imagingpacemaker

Identifiers

PMID34031214
PMCPMC8149430
OpenAlexW3164318676

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.