ArticleCureus2025
Pacing-Induced Cardiomyopathy Following Permanent Pacemaker Implantation: A Case Report and Review of Management Strategies.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) is a well-documented complication of long-term right ventricular pacing (RVP) leading to left ventricular systolic dysfunction and heart failure. We describe a 58-year-old woman with a history of complete heart block who underwent single-chamber pacemaker implantation. Eleven months later, she presented with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class IV heart failure and bilateral pleural effusions. Investigations revealed a significant drop in ejection fraction from 55% to 25%, with no other identifiable cause of heart failure. She was diagnosed with PICM and successfully managed with medical therapy and upgrade to cardiac resynchronisation therapy pacemaker (CRT-P). Her clinical symptoms and left ventricular function improved significantly. This case highlights the importance of early recognition of PICM and the benefit of CRT-P upgrade in patients with high RVP burden.
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.