Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41384280›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management2025

Short- and Mid-term Outcomes of the Extravascular Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator in Pediatric and Adolescent Patients: A Single-center Experience.

Nikola Dragisic, Emily R Backes, Lindsey Malloy-Walton, Edo K Bedzra, William J Gibson, Philip M Chang

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Letter from the Editor in Chief.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Nikola DragisicWard Family Heart Center, Children's Mercy Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Emily R BackesWard Family Heart Center, Children's Mercy Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Lindsey Malloy-WaltonWard Family Heart Center, Children's Mercy Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Edo K BedzraWard Family Heart Center, Children's Mercy Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, USA.
William J GibsonWard Family Heart Center, Children's Mercy Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Philip M ChangWard Family Heart Center, Children's Mercy Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Experience with the Aurora extravascular (EV) implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) remains limited among pediatric centers in contrast to its broader implantation in adults. We evaluated our single-center experience with the EV ICD as part of our standard ICD options for treatment of malignant ventricular arrhythmias in pediatric subjects. Following approval for EV ICD implantation at our center, five consecutive adolescent patients underwent implantation over a 7-month period. Patient characteristics, qualification for EV ICD placement, nuances in EV ICD implantation in each patient, and post-implant follow-up were reviewed. A total of six out of eight consecutive ICD candidates were identified as potential EV ICD candidates, with five patients undergoing eventual EV ICD implantation (average age, 16.8 years [range, 14-19 years]; four males). Indications for ICD included genetic arrhythmias (n = 3) and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (n = 2). All patients underwent successful implantation without intraoperative or early postoperative complications. No lead dislodgement, device migration, infection, or inappropriate shocks were observed. All patients demonstrated appropriate R-wave sensing and stable lead parameters at early (4- to 6-week) and mid-term (>3- to 6-month) follow-up. Post-implant exercise testing in two patients showed no significant P- or T-wave oversensing. EV ICD implantation is feasible and well tolerated in appropriately selected pediatric patients. Most pediatric ICD referrals were candidates for EV ICD implant when integrating the EV ICD in regular practice. Implant indications differ among pediatric versus adult EV ICD recipients. While early outcomes are favorable, long-term performance and applicability in smaller patients require further investigation.

Indexed as

AuroraEV ICDoutcomespediatric

Identifiers

PMID41384280
PMCPMC12694893

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.