ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Case Report: Sequential leadless pacing after battery depletion in a patient with recurrent device-related infection.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Leadless pacemakers offer an important alternative for patients with recurrent cardiac implantable electronic device infections. However, clinical data on long-term management and sequential implantation strategies after battery depletion remain limited. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a sequential leadless-only pacing strategy in a patient with a multi-decade history of pacing-related complications. Case Presentation: We report the long-term clinical course of a patient with a 26-year history of cardiac pacing (2000-2026). Following multiple transvenous system failures and recurrent infections, the patient transitioned to a leadless platform in 2017. We describe the clinical rationale and procedural outcome of upgrading from a depleted first-generation leadless pacemaker (Micra VR, implanted 2017, left Results: Sequential implantation was successfully performed in 2025, with the new device implanted at the right ventricular mid-septum while the previously implanted device was left Conclusion: A sequential leadless-only pacing strategy, including a leave-in-situ approach, may represent a feasible and safe long-term option in selected high-risk patients with device-related infections and a history of transvenous system extraction.
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.