ReviewPacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE2025
Expected Benefits From Antibacterial Envelope in Different CIED Patient Populations.
Review in Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE, 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.
- Contemporary practice about cardiac implantable electronic device infections prevention: A French multicenter survey.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- Expected Benefits From Antibacterial Envelope in Different CIED Patient Populations.Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2025Review
- Preclinical evaluation of a compliant and absorbable cardiac implantable electronic device antibacterial envelope.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Antibacterial envelope has proven to be safe and effective in reducing cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection. Recently, its role in pocket healing process has also started to be studied, showing additional potential benefits for the patients. Risk scores such as the PADIT and the BLISTER ones have been developed to stratify patients at higher risk of developing CIED infections, but their use is still limited. There is a need for clear and concise practical guidance and scores for the correct stratification of patients at risk to develop CIED infections, to apply an effective preventive strategy. This article examines the most recent findings on the effectiveness of antibacterial envelopes in preventing CIED infections and introduces the latest concept of pocket stabilization. Additionally, patient populations that could potentially benefit from antibacterial envelope for both indications are provided based on the agreement of an expert panel made up of 16 European electrophysiologists from high-volume centers. Future studies will have to evaluate the strength of those proposals and the benefits of pocket stabilization in the long-term.
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.