ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2022
Revisiting where to apply preimplant mapping to improve P-wave sensing of insertable cardiac monitors.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- P-Wave Oversensing by the Implantable Cardiac Monitor During Paroxysmal Atrioventricular Block: What Is the Mechanism?Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2025Article
- Revisiting where to apply preimplant mapping to improve P-wave sensing of insertable cardiac monitors.Journal of arrhythmia · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs) are used for long-term cardiac rhythm monitoring. They have proven useful in diagnosing arrhythmias. They are conventionally inserted at the 4th intercostal space without preimplant mapping. Method: We develop a new method, VisP, that finds an optimal insertion position by applying the lightweight preimplant mapping to nine candidate positions beyond the conventional ones. We retrospectively analyze consecutive 60 patients who underwent ICM insertion (Reveal LINQ™) between April 2019 and March 2021 and compare the two groups with and without VisP. Results: After 9 patients were excluded because of ectopic atrial rhythms or atrial fibrillation, 51 patients were analyzed. Thirty-one patients underwent the conventional insertion (non-mapping), whereas 20 patients underwent VisP. VisP achieved large P-wave amplitudes while retaining the R-wave amplitude for all patients; in contrast, P waves were not detected for 11 patients out of the 31 patients in the non-mapping group (35%). On average, the P-wave amplitude was 0.065 mV for VisP, compared to 0.029 mV for the non-mapping group ( Conclusions: VisP improves the diagnostic ability of ICMs by finding an optimal position that yields reliable sensing of P waves while keeping high R-wave sensing.
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.