SynthesisJournal of neurology2022
The efficacy and safety of insertable cardiac monitor on atrial fibrillation detection in patients with ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of implantable cardiac monitors on preventing stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- Implantable Cardiac Monitoring for Atrial Fibrillation Detection in Patients with Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.NeuroSci · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) leads to a high risk of recurrent stroke, and the insertable cardiac monitor (ICM), as a new kind of electrocardiographic monitoring device, has been proven to enhance the recognition rate of AF. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the ICM use in AF detection of patients with stroke. We pooled 1233 patients from three randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The detection rate of AF was superior in the ICM group to that in the control group at 6 months (risk ratio [RR], 4.63; P < 0.0001; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.17-9.90) and 12 months (RR, 5.04; P < 0.00001; 95% CI, 2.93 to 8.68). Patients in the ICM group had a higher rate of oral anticoagulant usage (RR, 2.76; P < 0.00001; 95% CI, 1.89-4.02). However, there was no difference in the time to first detection of AF within 12 months (mean difference, - 8.28; P = 0.82; 95% CI, - 77.84-61.28) or the rate of recurrent ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (RR, 0.88; P = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.60-1.28) between the ICM and control groups. In addition, the ICM group experienced more adverse events than the control group within 12 months (RR, 4.42; P = 0.002; 95% CI, 1.69-11.55). To conclude, the sensitivity of ICM is superior to that of conventional external cardiac monitoring. Reducing adverse reactions will be a new development direction of ICM.
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.