ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2024
Evaluation of ventricular pacing suppression algorithms in dual chamber pacemaker: Results of "LEADER" study.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exercise-induced atrioventricular block in a patient with a pacemaker: a functional consequence of AV search algorithms-a case report.European heart journal. Case reports · 2026Article
- Preferences of Patients and Cardiologists Regarding Pacemaker Characteristics in Spain: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Evaluation of ventricular pacing suppression algorithms in dual chamber pacemaker: Results of "LEADER" study.Journal of arrhythmia · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is limited research on the intra-individual efficacy of ventricular pacing minimization algorithms developed by Biotronik-the Ventricular Pace Suppression algorithm (VpS) and the Intrinsic Rhythm Support plus algorithm (IRSplus) (BIOTRONIK SE & Co. KG, Berlin, Germany). We performed a randomized pilot trial that evaluated the efficacy of two algorithms in patients with symptomatic sinus node dysfunction (SND) who received a dual-chamber pacemaker. Methods: The trial was conducted in 11 tertiary hospitals in South Korea. The patients were randomized to either the VpS or IRSplus algorithm group after a 3-month period of fixed atrioventricular (AV) delay. The primary outcome was the ventricular pacing percentage (Vp%) at each follow-up visit. The secondary outcomes were the occurrence of heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) during the study period. Results: Data from 131 patients were analyzed. Initially, their average Vp% over 3 months with a fixed AV interval was 14.1 ± 19.4%. Patients were randomly assigned to VpS and IRSplus groups, with 66 and 65 in each. Algorithms reduced average Vp% to 4.0 ± 11.3% at 9 months and 6.7 ± 14.9% at 15 months. These algorithms were more effective for patients with paced AV delay (PAVD) ≤300 ms compared to those with PAVD >300 ms. Both algorithms were equally effective in reducing Vp%. Clinical AF or HF hospitalization was not observed during the study period. Conclusion: The VpS and IRSplus algorithms are effective and safe in minimizing unnecessary ventricular pacing in 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.