ArticlePediatric cardiology2025
Effect of Bedside Ultrasound-Guided Versus Fluoroscopy-Guided Transvenous Cardiac Temporary Pacing in Children with Bradyarrhythmia.
Article in Pediatric cardiology, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To compare the efficacy and safety of bedside ultrasound-guided and fluoroscopy-guided transvenous cardiac temporary pacing in the treatment of bradyarrhythmia in children. Children treated by temporary intravenous cardiac pacing from January 2016 to June 2023 in Hunan Provincial Children's Hospital were enrolled, and the characteristics and data of the cases were summarized. Patients were divided into bedside ultrasound-guided group (ultrasound group) and fluoroscopy-guided group (fluoroscopy group) according to the implantation guidance methods. The efficacy, safety, and incidence of complications in children were compared, and follow-up analysis was carried out. A total of 30 children were enrolled, including 18 males and 12 females, with a median age of 5.5 (2.9, 10.0) years and a median weight of 18.7 (12.7, 32.7) kg. The most common primary diseases were fulminant myocarditis (13/30 cases) and congenital high-grade AVB (10/30 cases). Among them, the proportion of congenital high AVB in the fluoroscopy group was significantly higher than that in the ultrasound group, and the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.007). The implantation process was successful in all 30 children. From the time of pacing decision to implantation, the median time of ultrasound group was 56 (30, 60) min and that of fluoroscopy group was 154 (78,180) min, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.001). A total of 5 cases developed complications. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). Compared with traditional fluoroscopic temporary pacing, bedside ultrasound-guided temporary pacing technology can effectively shorten the operation time and reduce the occurrence of complications and has become a better choice for children's emergency and critical care treatment. The right internal jugular vein is preferred for intravenous implantation.
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.