Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39776725›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Complete Heart Block in a Patient Declining Pacemaker Implantation: A Discussion on Patient-Centered Care and Shared Decision-Making.

Robert W Buntyn, Vraj Patel, Hope N Lewis, Thein T Aung, Vaskar Mukerji

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Robert W BuntynInternal Medicine, Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine, Dayton, USA.
Vraj PatelInternal Medicine, Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine, Dayton, USA.
Hope N LewisCardiology, Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine, Dayton, USA.
Thein T AungCardiology, Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine, Dayton, USA.
Vaskar MukerjiCardiology, Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine, Dayton, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation is the standard of care in patients with complete heart block (CHB) and second-degree type II atrioventricular (AV) block irrespective of patient symptoms when the conduction abnormality is irreversible. CHB generally constitutes a medical emergency that can be fatal if not urgently treated. This is in contrast to first-degree AV block and second-degree type I AV block, which require PPM implantation only in very special circumstances. While second-degree type II AV block is considered to be at high risk for progression to CHB, this does not occur with first-degree and second-degree type I AV blocks. Here, we present a patient who demonstrated over a number of years a progression from first-degree to second-degree type I AV block and then, quite unexpectedly, to CHB. Despite multiple discussions of the benefits of PPM implantation with cardiology staff, the patient elected to forgo the procedure. This case discusses patient-centered care and the therapeutic dilemma that can develop when there is an incongruence between the principles of beneficence and patient autonomy.

Indexed as

av nodecomplete heart blockdecision-making autonomyfirst-degree heart blockgoals of carepacemakerpatient-centered caresecond-degree heart block

Identifiers

PMID39776725
PMCPMC11703641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.