ArticleAnnals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc2026
Outcomes of Intravenous Normal Saline Infusion Pre-Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Versus No Infusion in Fasting.
Article in Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Commentary on: Outcomes of Intravenous Normal Saline Infusion Pre-Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Versus no Infusion in Fasting.Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc · 2026Article
- Outcomes of Intravenous Normal Saline Infusion Pre-Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Versus No Infusion in Fasting.Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVenous puncture failure during cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation is a significant procedural challenge, particularly in fasting patients. Pre-procedural intravenous normal saline (NS) infusion may enhance venous filling and improve procedural outcomes, but evidence in this setting is limited.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study at Abbas Institute of Medical Sciences, including 2852 patients undergoing CIED implantation. Patients were divided into two groups: those who received intravenous NS infusion prior to the procedure (n = 1130) and those who did not (n = 1722). Baseline demographics, procedural details, and outcomes-including venous puncture failure, arterial puncture, site change, and acute kidney injury (AKI)-were compared.
resultsThe NS group demonstrated a significantly lower rate of venous puncture failure (4.6% vs. 8.9%, p < 0.001) and arterial puncture failure (1.6% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.03). AKI occurred less frequently in the NS group, although this difference was not statistically significant (1.8% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.09). Predictors of venous puncture failure included absence of NS infusion (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.5-3.0), BMI ≥ 30, and CKD. ROC analysis demonstrated good model discrimination (AUC = 0.81).
conclusionPre-procedural NS infusion significantly improves venous puncture success in fasting patients undergoing CIED implantation.
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.