ArticlePloS one2025
Risk assessment of temporary pacing for cardiac arrest after cardiopulmonary bypass-assisted cardiovascular surgery: A case-control study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Challenging Dilemma regarding Cardiac Advanced Life Support in Patients with Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: A Letter to Editor.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCardiac arrest happens in 0.7%-5.2% patients after cardiovascular surgery, and cases with asystole or severe bradycardia need timely temporary pacing. However, routine temporary pacing wire insertion in cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB)-assisted cardiovascular surgery has been questioned for its noteworthy complications. This study aimed to quantify the risk of temporary pacing for cardiac arrest after CPB-assisted cardiovascular surgery.
methods2326 patients undergoing CPB-assisted cardiovascular surgery were enrolled. Age, sex, body mass index, preoperative rhythm, operation type, ablation, CPB pump, cardioplegia type and volume, hypothermia, circulation, CPB time, aortic clamping time were compared between patients having and not having temporary pacing according to the indications by multiple logistic regression (MLR). A scoring system was developed based on the β parameters of identified independent risk factors in MLR analyses. The score cutoff was determined by the negative likelihood ratio to exclude the need of temporary pacing.
results108 patients (4.6%) had temporary pacing. Old age (per year) (P < 0.001), preoperative atrial fibrillation (P < 0.001), long CPB time (per minute) (P = 0.017) contributed to the risk of cardiac arrest. Having mitral valve replacement (MVR) (P = 0.033), double valve replacement (DVR), MVR+tricuspid valvuloplasty (TVP) (P = 0.009), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)+MVR (P = 0.0495) (versus CABG) were independent risk factors. The scoring system, score = age (year)/40 + CPB time (min)/350+ [preoperative atrial fibrillation]×1, can quantitatively assess the associated risk with an area under receiver of characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of 0.74 (95% confidential interval 0.69-0.79) (P < 0.001). The negative likelihood ratio was < 0.1 when score≤1.138. Therefore, the cutoff of excluding temporary pacing was set as ≤1, which achieved a 0% false negative rate in our cases.
conclusionTo minimize iatrogenic complications caused by unnecessary temporary pacing wire insertion, while ensuring patients with risks of asystole or severe bradycardia receive timely pacing, surgeons may identify cases with negligible risks of cardiac arrest through the scoring system.
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.