ArticleJACC. Case reports2026
Pacemaker Lead Perforation Leading to Cardiac Tamponade and Subsequent Anterior STEMI.
Article in JACC. Case reports, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPacemaker lead perforation is an uncommon but potentially fatal complication of cardiac implantable electronic devices, particularly when hemopericardium and tamponade occur in patients requiring antithrombotic therapy. CASE REPORT: A 74-year-old woman with atrial fibrillation on apixaban and a recent dual-chamber pacemaker implantation presented with dizziness, falling, and dysarthria; her brain computed tomography was negative. She developed syncope with a 6-second ventricular pause and enlarging pericardial effusion and an emergent surgical pericardial window with drainage of 350 mL of hemorrhagic fluid, confirming right ventricular lead perforation left in situ. Shortly after stabilization, she developed anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction because of proximal left anterior descending artery occlusion that was treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. Echocardiogram showed a left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% to 40% without recurrent effusion.
conclusionsEarly recognition, prompt drainage, and careful balancing of bleeding and thrombosis risks are essential; multidisciplinary management enables favorable outcomes. TAKE-HOME MESSAGE: Maintain suspicion for lead perforation despite a normal device interrogation, and act rapidly in the event of tamponade while coordinating multidisciplinary care.
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.