ReviewClinical cardiology2026
Tricuspid Regurgitation After Leadless Pacemaker Implantation: The Role of Atrioventricular Synchrony.
Review in Clinical cardiology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTricuspid regurgitation (TR) is a recognized complication of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), driven by both mechanical lead interference and pacing-induced dyssynchrony. Leadless pacemakers eliminate transvalvular leads; however, the role of atrioventricular (AV) synchrony in mitigating TR progression remains unclear.
methodsThis narrative review was informed by a structured literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library through June 2025 using the search terms "leadless pacemaker," "Micra," "tricuspid regurgitation," "atrioventricular synchrony," and "conduction system pacing." Original studies, systematic reviews, and major guideline or review articles relevant to leadless pacing and TR were considered. Articles were selected based on relevance to the review objectives rather than predefined systematic review criteria. Formal risk-of-bias assessment or quality appraisal was not performed.
findingsLeadless pacemakers generally demonstrate neutral effects on TR severity compared with baseline, although worsening of TR has been reported in approximately 9%-33% of patients across observational studies. Available evidence suggests that loss of AV synchrony is associated with TR progression independent of device type; however, pacing-associated TR is multifactorial and likely also reflects ventricular dyssynchrony, right ventricular pacing burden, papillary muscle discoordination, right ventricular dysfunction, and progressive right-heart remodeling. Direct comparative data evaluating Micra AV versus Micra VR with respect to TR outcomes remain unavailable.
conclusionsAV synchrony is biologically plausible for mitigating TR progression, but direct comparative evidence between Micra AV and Micra VR is lacking. Emerging dual-chamber leadless systems may improve preservation of AV synchrony while maintaining the advantages of leadless pacing, although their long-term effects on TR remain to be established. Prospective studies incorporating standardized echocardiographic endpoints are needed.
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.