Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35835888›Full record

ReviewJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2025

Transvenous or subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator: a review to aid decision-making.

Milena Leo, Alexander J Sharp, Andre Briosa e Gala, Michael T B Pope, Timothy R Betts

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Milena LeoDepartment of Cardiology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Alexander J SharpDepartment of Cardiology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK. alex.sharp@ouh.nhs.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-5994-7798
Andre Briosa e GalaDepartment of Cardiology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Michael T B PopeDepartment of Cardiology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Timothy R BettsDepartment of Cardiology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is a proven treatment for preventing sudden cardiac death. Transvenous leads are associated with significant mortality and morbidity, and the subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) addresses this. However, it is not without limitations, in particular the absence of anti-tachycardia pacing. The decision of which device is most suitable for an individual patient is often complex. Here, we review the relative merits and weaknesses of both the transvenous and S-ICD. We summarise the available evidence for each device in particular patient cohorts, namely: ischaemic and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy, idiopathic ventricular fibrillation, Brugada syndrome, long QT syndrome, arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy, and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

Indexed as

Arrhythmias, CardiacClinical Decision-MakingDeath, Sudden, CardiacDefibrillators, ImplantableHumansImplantable cardioverter-defibrillatorSubcutaneous ICDSudden cardiac deathTransvenous ICDVentricular arrhythmias

Identifiers

PMID35835888
OpenAlexW4285494352

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.