ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2021
Factors affecting signal quality in implantable cardiac monitors with long sensing vector.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Changes in R-wave amplitude at implantation are associated with gender and orientation of insertable cardiac monitor: observations from the confirm Rx™ body posture and physical activity study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2022Trial
- Coexistence of R-Wave Oversensing and Undersensing in an Implantable Loop Recorder: The Issue of Multiple Sensing in Implantable Loop Recorders.The American journal of case reports · 2025Article
- Implantation of a novel insertable cardiac monitor: preliminary multicenter experience in Europe.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2024Review
- Review
- Implantable Loop Recorder with Long Sensing Vector: Safety, Acceptability, and Sensing Performance in Pediatric Patients.Pediatric cardiology · 2023Article
- Insertable cardiac monitor with a long sensing vector: Impact of obesity on sensing quality and safety.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Programming Optimization in Implantable Cardiac Monitors to Reduce False-Positive Arrhythmia Alerts: A Call for Research.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Factors affecting signal quality in implantable cardiac monitors with long sensing vector.Journal of arrhythmia · 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
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeElectrical artefacts are frequent in implantable cardiac monitors (ICMs). We analyzed the subcutaneous electrogram (sECG) provided by an ICM with a long sensing vector and factors potentially affecting its quality.
methodsConsecutive ICM recipients underwent a follow-up where demographics, body mass index (BMI), implant location, and surface ECG were collected. The sECG was then analyzed in terms of R-wave amplitude and P-wave visibility.
resultsA total of 84 patients (43% female, median age 68 [58-76] years) were enrolled at 3 sites. ICMs were positioned with intermediate inclination (n = 44, 52%), parallel (n = 35, 43%), or perpendicular (n = 5, 6%) to the sternum. The median R-wave amplitude was 1.10 (0.72-1.48) mV with P waves readily visible in 69.2% (95% confidence interval, CI: 57.8%-79.2%), partially visible in 23.1% [95% CI: 14.3%-34.0%], and never visible in 7.7% [95% CI: 2.9%-16.0%] of patients. Men had higher R-wave amplitudes compared to women (1.40 [0.96-1.80] mV vs 1.00 [0.60-1.20] mV,
conclusionIn ordinary clinical practice, ICMs with long sensing vector provided median R-wave amplitude above 1 mV and reliable P-wave visibility of nearly 70%, regardless of the position of the device. Women and obese patients showed lower but still very good signal quality.
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.