ArticleJournal of cardiovascular electrophysiology2025
Real World Performance of an Individualized Antitachycardia Pacing Algorithm.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA novel individualized antitachycardia pacing (IATP) algorithm using the post-pacing interval for real-time control has been introduced. Performance information is limited to a small safety and feasibility study with additional single-center and case studies. A larger-scale analysis is needed to better understand algorithm performance.
methodsDeidentified remote monitoring transmissions from devices with the IATP therapy applied were randomly selected. Rhythms were classified and effects of the novel algorithm were assessed. For monomorphic ventricular tachycardias (MVTs) proportions of successful therapy, shock-free episodes, and acceleration were calculated using generalized estimating equations to correct for multiple episodes and compute statistics of the algorithm's performance.
resultsThere were 2259 MVT episodes in 336 patients. IATP succeeded in 87.1% of MVT episodes with 89.9% of MVT episodes ultimately free of shock therapy. Based on multivariate analysis, significant factors in therapy success were programming of at least the recommended number of sequences (90% at least recommended vs 73%, p = 0.00088) and female sex (95% for females vs 86%, p = 0.002). A trend to higher success was found for MVT with a cycle length of 320 ms or greater (90% vs. 83%, p = 0.10). The IATP accelerated 3.6% of MVT episodes. None of the available factors was significantly associated with acceleration in the multivariate analysis.
conclusionsThe IATP algorithm succeeded in a large proportion of MVT episodes and with low acceleration in patients randomly selected from remote monitoring transmissions. Using at least the recommended number of sequences had the strongest association with successful therapy.
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.