Trial reportScientific reports2025
Effect of pocket compression device on pocket hematoma after cardiac implantable electronic device implantation.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Risk Factors and Preventing Strategies of Pocket Hematoma After Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Implantation: A Systematic Review.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Efficacy of a novel compression tool in preventing complications following device implantation.Open heart · 2025Article
- Pocket compression devices: a novel, non-invasive, and cost-effective approach to pocket hematoma resolution.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pocket hematoma is a common and serious complication following cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation, contributing to significant morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a novel pocket compression device in reducing pocket hematoma occurrence. We enrolled 242 patients undergoing CIED implantation, randomly assigning them to receive either the novel compression vest with a pressure cuff or conventional sandbag compression. Pocket hematomas were categorized as grade 1 (mild), grade 2 (moderate), or grade 3 (severe, requiring intervention or prolonged hospitalization). The primary endpoint, incidence of pocket hematoma 24 h post-procedure, did not significantly differ between the two groups (26.7% vs. 19.7%, p = 0.224). Rates of grade 2 hematoma were similarly low and comparable (2.5% vs. 0.8%, p = 0.368), with no grade 3 hematomas observed. Skin reactions and patient comfort were similar between groups. The sole predictor for hematoma occurrence was current oral anticoagulation use. In conclusion, our study found a low incidence of clinically significant pocket hematomas. The novel pocket compression device showed comparable efficacy to conventional methods, suggesting it as a viable alternative for reducing post-procedural complications without additional adverse effects.Trial registration number: The study was registered in the Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR) at https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/ , with the identification number TCTR20230913005, date of first trial registration 13/09/2023.
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.