ReviewHeart rhythm O22024
Left ventricular pacing through coronary sinus after tricuspid valve replacement: A case report and review of the literature.
Review in Heart rhythm O2, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Strategy for pacemaker implantation following transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement: A real world single centre experience.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Article
- Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Replacement With the EVOQUE System: A Case-Review Series Highlighting Procedural and Management Considerations.Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In patients with a mechanical tricuspid prosthetic valve, the transvenous position of a ventricular lead through the coronary sinus (CS) is a good alternative option to right ventricular or epicardial lead implantation. In cardiac resynchronization therapy, pacing the left ventricular lateral wall was considered the best site for the CS lead. However, for patients without a left bundle branch block, the best position of CS leads remains controversial. Here, we present a case of placing CS lead in the anterior interventricular vein. Measurements at implantation and 2 years' follow-up reported low pacing thresholds with good sensing thresholds. The electrocardiograph showed narrow QRS complexes (120 ms) and follow-up echocardiography at 2 years presented left ventricular ejection fraction 58.9%.
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.