ArticleCJC open2025
Long-Term Safety and Feasibility of Right Atrial Septal Pacing with Lumenless Leads in Patients with Sick Sinus Syndrome.
Article in CJC open, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Right atrial appendage pacing (RAAp) may increase the risk of atrial fibrillation (AF), compared to right atrial septal pacing (RASp). However, the implantation of atrial septal stylet-driven leads (SDLs) for RASp can present procedural challenges and limit its clinical application. We evaluated the long-term safety and feasibility of using lumenless leads (LLLs) with the delivery sheath for RASp and SDLs for RAAp, and compared AF events between the RASp and RAAp in patients with sick sinus syndrome. Methods: A total of 329 patients with sick sinus syndrome who underwent pacemaker implantation were divided into 2 groups, based on the site of atrial lead placement: the RASp group (n = 162) with LLLs, and the RAAp group (n = 167) with SDLs. Implantation success rate, procedural time, P-wave characteristics, pacing parameters, complications, and AF episodes were compared between the 2 groups. Results: The success rates were similar for the RASp and RAAp groups (98.8% vs 97.6%, Conclusions: The long-term safety and feasibility of RASp with LLLs were comparable to those of RAAp patients with SDLs. The RASp reduced the incidence of postoperative AF episodes and new-onset AF. The RASp by delivery sheath implantation is a safe and effective method.
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.