ArticleHeart (British Cardiac Society)1998
Single chamber atrial pacing: an underused and cost-effective pacing modality in sinus node disease.
Article in Heart (British Cardiac Society), 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00156741 (IntAct, Study on Promotion of Intrinsic Activity.), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
IntAct, Study on Promotion of Intrinsic Activity.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term follow up of single-chamber atrial pacing-system upgrade and Wenckebach block point behavior: potential implications for leadless AAI pacing?Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2025Article
- Observational
- Current concepts in pacing 2010-2011: the right and wrong way to pace.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2011Article
- [Maintenance of AAI(R) mode at the time of generator replacement].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the safety and cost effectiveness of single chamber atrial pacing in patients with sinus node disease.
designRetrospective follow up study.
settingTertiary referral centre. PATIENTS: 81 patients with single chamber atrial pacemakers implanted between 1992 and 1996.
main outcome measuresThe development of high grade atrioventricular block resulting in a further pacemaker procedure. The cost savings of changing our current pacing practice to conform with British Pacing and Electrophysiology Group guidelines.
resultsDuring the follow up period, four patients (5.8%) required a further procedure to upgrade their atrial pacemaker to a dual chamber system owing to the development of high grade atrioventricular block. In 1995 and 1996, 343 pacemakers were implanted in patients with sinus node disease; 19 (5.5%) received single chamber atrial pacemakers and 271 (79%) dual chamber pacemakers. If the current pacing practice was changed so that all patients received single chamber atrial pacemakers, with revision for symptomatic atrioventricular block, savings in excess of 206,000 Pounds would have been made in the two year period.
conclusionsAtrial pacing in patients with sinus node disease is underused. The need for patients to undergo further procedures owing to the development of atrioventricular block is small and significant cost savings could be made by changing pacemaker practice.
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.