ArticleIndian pacing and electrophysiology journal
2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients.
Article in Indian pacing and electrophysiology journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Brazilian Guideline for Exercise Testing in Children and Adolescents - 2024.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Guideline
- Dyssynchrony-Induced Cardiomyopathy in Children: Mechanisms, Diagnosis, and Contemporary Management.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Enhanced Implantable Loop Recorders in Pediatric Patients: Effects on Device Performance and Clinical Workflow in a Single-Center Experience.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2026Article
- Dual-chamber epicardial pacing in preterm and low birth weight infants with congenital complete atrioventricular block: a staged approach.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Early Currents: Developmental Electrophysiology and Arrhythmia in Pediatric Congenital Heart Disease.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Prognosis of pediatric restrictive cardiomyopathy: more severe in sarcomeric variants.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- The λ pattern on time-RR interval scatter plot of neonatal ambulatory ECG: a marker of transient bradycardia.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Management of Pediatric Heart Failure.Korean circulation journal · 2024Review
- A Study to Analyse the Feasibility and Effectiveness of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Used in Young Children.Pediatric cardiology · 2024Article
- Inter-American Society of Cardiology (CIFACAH-ELECTROSIAC) and Latin-American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS): multidisciplinary review on the appropriate use of implantable cardiodefibrillator in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2023Article
- Cardiovascular Disease in Primary Sjögren's Syndrome: Raising Clinicians' Awareness.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
- 2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients: Executive summary.Indian pacing and electrophysiology journalArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
38 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.
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.