ArticleJournal of cardiovascular electrophysiology2026
Impact of Atrial and Dual-Chamber Leadless Pacing on Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Screening Eligibility.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLeadless pacemakers (LPs) are increasingly used in patients at high risk of transvenous lead complications. If indications for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy arise later, a subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) may represent an attractive option. However, S-ICD implantation requires pre-implant electrocardiographic screening, and pacing may impact implantation eligibility. Thus, the purpose of the present analysis was to evaluate S-ICD screening eligibility in patients with right atrial (RA) and dual-chamber (DR) LP during intrinsic rhythm, atrial pacing, and dual-chamber pacing. METHODS AND
resultsPatients implanted with active-fixation RA and dual-chamber LP systems underwent S-ICD screening using the automated screening tool. Electrocardiographic parameters were assessed during intrinsic rhythm, atrial pacing (AAI), and dual-chamber pacing (DDD). Screening eligibility was assessed separately for each rhythm. Combined eligibility was defined as the presence of at least one acceptable vector in intrinsic and paced rhythms. Forty-one patients were included (median age 67 years; 61% female). During intrinsic rhythm, at least one acceptable vector was present in 91.4% of patients. Screening eligibility remained high during atrial pacing (77.1%) but decreased substantially during dual-chamber pacing (33.3%). Primary and secondary sensing vectors demonstrated the highest screening success across rhythm conditions, with positive rates of 60.0% and 62.3% for AAI, and 18.5% and 11.1% for DDD pacing.
conclusionIn patients with RA and DR LPs, S-ICD screening eligibility is preserved in most cases during intrinsic rhythm and atrial pacing, but markedly reduced during DDD pacing. Pacing mode should be considered when evaluating the feasibility of combining LP systems with an S-ICD.
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.