ReviewThe Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management2026
A Contemporary Review of Subcutaneous and Extravascular Implantable Cardiac Defibrillators.
Review in The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management, 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.
- Letter from the Editor in Chief.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2026Article
- Sudden cardiac arrest in an athlete due to dilated cardiomyopathy masquerading as athlete's heart: a case report.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are life-saving devices used to prevent sudden cardiac death. Two newer types of ICDs-the extravascular ICD (EV-ICD) and the subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD)-offer alternatives to traditional transvenous ICDs. Additionally, efforts are being made to introduce defibrillation and pacing interventions through a single device called the modular cardiac rhythm management system (mCRM). This review compares the EV-ICD and S-ICD based on currently available clinical data, focusing on their safety and performance. Additionally, we review modular ICD systems, which integrate leadless pacing with defibrillation. We conducted a comprehensive literature search of PubMed and ScienceDirect, focusing on articles demonstrating the clinical outcomes of EV-ICDs and S-ICDs as well as modular systems. However, we found that sufficient studies are not available to determine the clinical efficacy and safety outcomes of EV-ICDs and the mCRM. Additionally, comparative studies between EV-ICDs and S-ICDs are still required to determine their relative roles in the field of electrophysiology, with the goal of empowering clinicians to understand these emerging technologies to support better patient care decision-making.
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.