Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34967945›Full record

ArticlePacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE2022

Optimizing atrio-ventricular delay in pacemakers using potentially implantable physiological biomarkers.

Daniel Keene, Alejandra A Miyazawa, Monika Johal, Ahran D Arnold, Nadine Ali, Khulat A Saqi, Katherine March, Leah Burden, Darrel P Francis, Zachary I Whinnett and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniel KeeneNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.
Alejandra A MiyazawaNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1958-7027
Monika JohalNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.
Ahran D ArnoldNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7597-0170
Nadine AliNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.
Khulat A SaqiNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.
Katherine MarchNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.
Leah BurdenNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.
Darrel P FrancisNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.
Zachary I WhinnettNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.
Matthew J Shun-ShinNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GBHammersmith Hospital · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation CS/15/3/31405British Heart Foundation FS/10/038British Heart Foundation FS/11/92/29122British Heart Foundation FS/13/44/30291British Heart Foundation FS/14/27/30752British Heart Foundation FS/15/53/31615British Heart Foundation FS/19/4/34013British Heart Foundation FS/20/11/34750British Heart Foundation SP/10/002/28189Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHemodynamically optimal atrioventricular (AV) delay can be derived by echocardiography or beat-by-beat blood pressure (BP) measurements, but analysis is labor intensive. Laser Doppler perfusion monitoring measures blood flow and can be incorporated into future implantable cardiac devices. We assess whether laser Doppler can be used instead of BP to optimize AV delay.

methodsFifty eight patients underwent 94 AV delay optimizations with biventricular or His-bundle pacing using laser Doppler and simultaneous noninvasive beat-by-beat BP. Optimal AV delay was defined using a curve of hemodynamic response to switching from AAI (reference state) to DDD (test state) at several AV delays (40-320 ms), with automatic quality control checking precision of the optimum. Five subsequent patients underwent an extended protocol to test the impact of greater numbers of alternations on optimization quality.

results55/94 optimizations passed quality control resulting in an optimal AV delay on laser Doppler similar to that derived by BP (median absolute deviation 12 ms). An extended protocol with increasing number of replicates consistently improved quality and reduced disagreement between laser Doppler and BP optima. With only five replicates, no optimization passed quality control, and the median absolute deviation would be 29 ms. These improved progressively until at 50 replicates, all optimizations passed quality control and the median absolute deviation was only 13 ms.

conclusionsLaser Doppler perfusion produces hemodynamic optima equivalent to BP. Quality control can be automatic. Adding more replicates, consistently improves quality. Future implantable devices could use such methods to dynamically and reliably optimize AV delays.

Indexed as

Atrioventricular NodePacemaker, ArtificialBiomarkersCardiac Pacing, ArtificialHeart VentriclesHemodynamicsHumansBiomarkersatrioventricular delayhaemodynamicslaser Doppler perfusion monitoringoptimizationpacemaker

Identifiers

PMID34967945
PMCPMC9305784
OpenAlexW4200425104

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.