ArticleEuropean heart journal. Case reports2024
Cardiac tamponade due to right coronary artery perforation following pacemaker implantation: a case report.
Article in European heart journal. Case reports, 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardiac tamponade due to perforation of a cardiac chamber is a rare complication occurring in only 0.3% of patients undergoing permanent pacemaker (PM) implantation. Notably, perforation of the right coronary artery (RCA) following permanent PM implantation has only been reported twice in the literature. We report a rare case of RCA perforation leading to life-threatening cardiac tamponade with symptom onset 4 days after PM implantation. Case summary: A 75-year-old woman underwent permanent PM implantation without any difficulties in placing pacemaker leads and with good thresholds. Four days later, the patient was readmitted in a state of shock due to cardiac tamponade. A blood gas analysis on the bloody pericardial effusion raised suspicion of ongoing arterial bleeding. A CT scan ruled out aortic dissection; instead, the source of bleeding was identified as a perforation in the RCA, which was managed surgically. Discussion: This case highlights the necessity of coronary artery perforation being among the differential diagnoses of cardiac tamponade after PM implantation, and it stresses the usefulness of performing a blood gas analysis on the bloody pericardial effusion.
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.