ReviewAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2026
Maternal complete heart block in pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice, 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
Background: Complete heart block (CHB) is an uncommon bradyarrhythmia complicating pregnancy, posing challenges to the treating team. Objective: To evaluate the maternal outcomes, other cardiac complications, and pregnancy outcomes among pregnant women with CHB and compare these outcomes among those managed with and without pacing. Methods: We searched two databases, i.e., MEDLINE and EMBASE, for studies reporting outcomes in pregnancies complicated by CHB. The bibliography of relevant articles was examined to identify additional articles. Maternal and perinatal outcomes, including obstetric and cardiac complications, were extracted. Using the random-effects model, pooled estimates of various outcomes are reported as percentages with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: A total of 294 pregnancies among 220 women with CHB, identified from 12 studies, were included in the analysis. Two-thirds had either temporary or permanent pacing during pregnancy. Arrhythmias other than CHB were the most common cardiac complications noted (2.7%, 95% CI: 0.9%-4.5%). Lead-related complications, such as lead migration (1.6%, 95% CI: 0.1%-3.0%), were uncommon. One maternal death was reported among the included studies, during the postpartum period in an asymptomatic mother who did not have pacing. Low birth weight was the most common complication (43.1%, 95% CI: 17% - 67%) in the studies reporting neonatal outcomes. Conclusion: Pregnancies complicated with CHB have low rates of adverse maternal and fetal/neonatal outcomes under multidisciplinary care. The outcomes were similar among those with and without pacemakers, suggesting that women can cope with the physiological changes of pregnancy even without pacing.
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.