ArticleJournal of cardiology cases2024
A case report of undetected cardiac arrest in a patient with an insertable cardiac monitor.
Article in Journal of cardiology cases, 2024. 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
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs) are small electrocardiographs implanted subcutaneously to automatically record electrocardiograms when arrhythmia is detected in patients with syncope. If the ICM misses a significant arrhythmia, it may delay the diagnosis of arrhythmogenic syncope and put the patient at risk. Herein, we describe a case of undetected cardiac arrest in a patient with ICM. An 87-year-old man with syncope was admitted to the hospital. After 8 days of monitoring, the cause could not be determined, and an ICM was implanted. Nine hours after implantation, the patient experienced cardiopulmonary arrest. Despite a body surface electrocardiogram showing ventricular flatline and fibrillation, the ICM failed to record. The cause of failure to record was considered to be the fluctuation in the R-wave amplitude of the ICM and noise oversensing. In conclusion, albeit infrequently, ICMs might overlook life-threatening arrhythmias. Even in cases where the ICM fails to detect an arrhythmia matching the symptoms, it may not be feasible to entirely rule out the presence of arrhythmias. Learning objective: Insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs) are used to diagnose arrhythmogenic syncope. However, extremely infrequently, ICM may fail to record life-threatening arrhythmias. Failure to capture arrhythmias can happen due to an unfortunate combination of factors such as a low amplitude of the recorded R wave and noise. Even in cases where the ICM does not detect an arrhythmia that matches the symptoms, it may not be feasible to completely exclude the presence of arrhythmias.
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.