ArticleJHLT open2024
Understanding the role of temporary epicardial pacemakers after heart transplantation in the cardiac intensive care unit.
Article in JHLT open, 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.
- Heart Transplantation Requiring Permanent Pacemaker: Risk Factors and Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Acute Cardiac Tamponade Caused by Right Ventricular Perforation After Temporary Transvenous Pacing.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation guidelines for the care of heart transplant recipients recommend the placement of temporary epicardial pacing wires at the time of surgery. However, there is little data regarding optimal postoperative pacing modality and its implications on intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS). We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of 187 patients who underwent heart transplantation from January 1, 2019 to February 28, 2023 and had postoperative epicardial pacemaker wires placed. The study's primary outcome was to observe the association between pacing modalities and prolonged ICU LOS (greater than 5 days). The secondary outcome was to observe the association between pacing modalities and prolonged hospital LOS (greater than 15 days), readmission within 30 days of discharge, days on inotropic and pressor support, death, high-grade rejection on biopsy, coronary artery vasculopathy at 1 year, primary graft dysfunction, mediastinitis, and development of a malignancy. Twenty-two patients (12%) had their pacing mode turned off at the time of arrival to the ICU, 36 patients (19%) had their pacing mode set to atrially paced, atrially sensed, inhibit, 101 patients (54%) had theirs set to dual chamber paced, dual chamber sensed, triger/inhibit sensed events, and 28 (15%) had theirs set to ventricularly paced, ventricularly sensed, inhibit. No mode of epicardial pacing was associated with an increased ICU LOS, hospital LOS, increased readmission rates, increased short-term adverse effects, increased long-term adverse effects, or increased duration of support with vasoactive medications. Our study demonstrated no significant association between the mode of temporary pacing and LOS or adverse effects after heart transplantation.
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.