SynthesisJournal of the American Heart Association2022
Subcutaneous Versus Transvenous Implantable Defibrillator Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials and Propensity Score-Matched Studies.
Synthesis in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postsurgical outcomes of nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas: a patient-level meta-analysis.Pituitary · 2023Pooled it
- Device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial.European heart journal · 2022Trial
- Similarities and Differences Between the Extravascular and the Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: Clinical Selection and Implantation (Part 1).Current cardiology reports · 2026Review
- Innovations in cardiac device therapy in the era of advanced rhythm management: implantable defibrillators and conduction system pacing.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2026Review
- Case Report: Brugada syndrome uncovered by delivery in a 32-year-old patient.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Significance of 3-dimensional cardiac anatomical axis as the predictor of low QRS amplitude of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.Heart rhythm O2 · 2025Article
- Totally Fluoroless Versus Limited Fluoroscopy-assisted Implantation: Identifying the Role of Fluoroscopy During Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator Implantation.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2025Article
- Successful implantation of an extravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in a patient with moderate pectus excavatum: a case report.European heart journal. Case reports · 2025Article
- Leadless pacing: a comprehensive review.European heart journal · 2025Review
- A Narrative Review of Current and Investigational Therapies in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and chronic kidney disease: a focus on therapies and interventions.Heart failure reviews · 2025Review
- Arrhythmias and Sudden Death: What is New in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy?Cardiac failure review · 2025Review
- Return to professional football after ICD implantation in athlete with apical hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.BMJ case reports · 2024Article
- First in Human Substernal Lead Extraction.JACC. Case reports · 2024Article
- Subcutaneous versus Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator in Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease Requiring Dialysis: Extended Long-Term Retrospective Multicenter Follow-Up.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2024Article
- Implantable Cardiac Devices in Patients with Brady- and Tachy-Arrhythmias: An Update of the Literature.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Measures to Prevent Infection in Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Replacements or Upgrades.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Comparison of infection and complication rates associated with transvenous vs. subcutaneous defibrillators in patients with stage 4 chronic kidney disease: a multicenter long-term retrospective follow-up.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator: A Contemporary Overview.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) have been of great interest as an alternative to transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (TV-ICDs). No meta-analyses synthesizing data from high-quality studies have yet been published. Methods and Results An electronic literature search was conducted to retrieve randomized controlled trials or propensity score-matched studies comparing S-ICD against TV-ICD in patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator indication. The primary outcomes were device-related complications and lead-related complications. Secondary outcomes were inappropriate shocks, appropriate shock, all-cause mortality, and infection. All outcomes were pooled under random-effects meta-analyses and reported as risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs. Kaplan-Meier curves of device-related complications were digitized to retrieve individual patient data and pooled under a 1-stage meta-analysis using Cox models to determine hazard ratios (HRs) of patients undergoing S-ICD versus TV-ICD. A total of 5 studies (2387 patients) were retrieved. S-ICD had a similar rate of device-related complications compared with TV-ICD (RR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.33-1.04];
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.