ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2026
Clinical Outcomes of Patients Hospitalized for Conventional Pacemaker Implantation With Protein-Energy Malnutrition.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2026. 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.
- Clinical Outcomes of Patients Hospitalized for Conventional Pacemaker Implantation With Protein-Energy Malnutrition.Journal of arrhythmia · 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
Introduction: The impact of protein-energy malnutrition (PEM) on patients hospitalized for conventional pacemaker implantation remains poorly understood. Methods: We utilized the 2020 U.S. National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database to evaluate the impact of PEM on the in-hospital outcomes of patients who underwent conventional pacemaker implantation. Patients aged 18 and older were identified by ICD-10 CM and PCS codes. Multivariable survey logistic and linear regression analyses were employed to examine in-hospital outcomes, including in-patient mortality, system-based outcomes, and post-procedural complications. Results: A total of 108 020 patients were identified with 4315 (3.99%) diagnosed with PEM. The mean age of the cohort was 76 years, and 47.5% were female. The overall mortality rate among patients undergoing pacemaker implantation was 1.07%. After adjusting for various patient and hospital confounding factors, PEM was significantly associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality (aOR 3.30, 95% CI 2.33-4.88, Conclusion: PEM was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality, extended hospital stays, and various post-procedural complications in patients undergoing conventional pacemaker implantation. Hence, prompt identification and effective management of PEM are essential for improving post-procedural outcomes in these patients.
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.