ArticleCureus2023
A Case Report of Pacemaker-Induced Cardiomyopathy in a Patient With Post-atrioventricular Node Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) is a rare but well-recognised phenomenon in patients requiring right ventricular (RV) pacing. It can be caused by single-chamber or dual-chamber pacemakers. We present a case of a 64-year-old female patient presenting to the pacemaker clinic with worsening shortness of breath and legs swelling. She was found to have atrial fibrillation and underwent atrioventricular node ablation followed by a dual chamber permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation as part of a 'pace and ablate' strategy to treat refractory symptomatic atrial tachycardia, and the patient was entirely dependent on RV pacing. In the immediate two months following PPM implantation, the patient was seen in the clinic and reported shortness of breath that was attributed to interstitial lung disease. However, a month later her symptoms worsened, stimulating a referral for echocardiography, which demonstrated a fall in her left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) from 60% to 30% in just four months after the device implantation. The patient was diagnosed with PICM. The patient's prognostic heart failure treatment was optimised and her device was upgraded to a cardiac resynchronisation (CRT) device with pacing functionality in an attempt to improve biventricular synchrony. The patient's symptoms have improved significantly since and a repeat echocardiogram 2 months later showed significant improvement in LVEF to 45-50%.
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.