ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2022
Clinical outcome for heart failure hospitalizations in patients with leadless pacemaker.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Acute Mortality and Complication Rates Following Leadless Pacemaker Placement Using National-Level Data.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Pooled it
- Short-term Outcomes of Leadless Pacemakers Compared to Conventional Transvenous Pacemakers in Patients over 80 Years Old.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
- Leadless pacemaker in atrioventricular block patients with specific indications: a systematic review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Temporal Trends and Prognostic Impact of Pacemaker-Associated Heart Failure: Insights from a Nationwide Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Worsening Heart Failure From Decreased Atrioventricular Synchronization Rate of a Leadless Pacemaker: Atrial Mechanical Oversensing.JACC. Case reports · 2025Article
- Clinical outcome for heart failure hospitalizations in patients with leadless pacemaker.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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The long-term performance of leadless pacemaker (LPM) has not been well evaluated. Methods: Between September 2017 and January 2021, 929 consecutive patients who underwent pacemaker implantation were grouped according to the types of pacemakers: LPM (LPM group, Results: The median follow-up duration was 1.7 years (interquartile range 0.8-2.6 years). Hospitalization rate for heart failure in the LPM group was 9.3%, 15.6%, and 21.6% at 1, 2, 3 years, respectively. The LPM group had a significantly higher adjusted heart failure hospitalization risk than the PM group [hazard ratio (HR) 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09-2.64, Conclusions: Patients who received LPM implantation had greater hospitalization risk for heart failure, compared to those who received conventional pacemaker implantation. The increased risk was mainly attributed to patients with SND.
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.