Observational studyIndian heart journal
Coexistent coronary artery disease in Indian patients undergoing permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) for symptomatic bradyarrhythmia.
Observational study in Indian heart journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Incidence of Coronary Artery Disease After Permanent Pacemaker Implantation: A Hospital-based Study from East India.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2024Article
- Article
- Resolution of Symptomatic Intermittent Sinoatrial Exit Block Associated With Unstable Angina Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.Cardiology research · 2022Article
- Development and Validation of a Nomogram for Predicting the Severity of Coronary Artery Disease Based on Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe cause-effect of conduction disturbance in chronic lesion of coronary arteries is complicated. This study was designed to evaluate coexistent CAD in patients with symptomatic bradyarrhythmia to find common anatomic basis for conduction disturbances and its relationship to conventional coronary risk factors.
methodsIn this prospective observational study, 929 patients who admitted for symptomatic bradyarrhythmia requiring permanent pacemaker implantation were included. All included patients underwent coronary angiography and were divided into groups based on angiographic findings. Association between conduction disturbances and these groups were analyzed.
resultsA total of 929 patients with mean age of 63.1 years were included in our study. We found age ≥50 years, male sex, presence of diabetes and hypertension as statistically significant predictors of abnormal coronary angiography. Obstructive CAD (≥50% stenosis) was found in 34.4% patients. Prevalence of single vessel disease, double vessel disease and triple vessel disease was 15.3%, 10.2% and 8.9% respectively. Severe coronary obstruction (≥90% obstruction) was found in 16.25% patients. Revascularization was advised in three fourth of cases of obstructive CAD. Approximately two third of patients didn't have significant obstruction in coronaries supplying the conduction system. Type 4 was the commonest anatomy in obstructive CAD. SA Nodal artery was found more diseased in patients of SSS with p value of 0.01.
conclusionObstructive CAD was found in one third of patients undergoing PPI. Age ≥50 years, male sex, diabetes and hypertension were found significantly correlated with presence of CAD and may act as important markers for the judgment of further coronary evaluation.
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.