ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Preclinical and clinical evaluation of ECM bioenvelopes for preventing CIED pocket complications.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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.
- Editorial: New advances in cardiac electrophysiology.Frontiers in cardiovascular 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
Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) envelopes were developed to secure the device within the surgical pocket, mitigating serious risks for migration or erosion. Available CIED envelopes are either biologic, constructed from non-crosslinked extracellular matrix (ECM), or non-biologic, composed of absorbable synthetic mesh impregnated with antibiotics. Multiple studies have documented constructive remodeling following implantation of the ECM-based bioenvelopes, leading to healthy wound healing and a vascularized surgical pocket. Non-biologic materials, in contrast, trigger a foreign-body response, leading to fibrous encapsulation of the device. Indeed, clinical studies of the bioenvelope have demonstrated constructive remodeling and integration into host tissues. One observational clinical study evaluating CIED reoperations found that patients previously implanted with the bioenvelope had well-vascularized surgical pockets with site-appropriate tissues that facilitated easier device replacement, as opposed to fibrotic encapsulation of the device in patients managed with non-biologic envelopes or without envelopes. A novel, recently approved antibiotic-eluting bioenvelope is designed to provide both support for healthy wound healing plus reduced infection risk, which is a common adverse outcome of CIED implantation. This next-generation bioenvelope includes absorbable discs impregnated with the broad-spectrum antibiotics rifampin and minocycline. Preclinical studies report excellent biocompatibility, biphasic release of antibiotics over 2 weeks, and complete eradication of bacterial inoculates commonly associated with CIED infections. Therefore, this new antibiotic eluting bioenvelope adds standardized drug delivery to the device, without compromising the wound-healing benefits of non-crosslinked ECM.
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.