↓ Skip to main content

The Effect of Right Ventricular Apical and Nonapical Pacing on the Short‐ and Long‐Term Changes in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized‐Controlled…

Overview of attention for article published in Pacing & Clinical Electrophysiology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Effect of Right Ventricular Apical and Nonapical Pacing on the Short‐ and Long‐Term Changes in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized‐Controlled Trials
Published in
Pacing & Clinical Electrophysiology, July 2015
DOI 10.1111/pace.12681
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohammad Akhtar Hussain, Luis Furuya-Kanamori, Gerald Kaye, Justin Clark, Suhail A R Doi

Abstract

The right ventricular apex (RVA) is the traditional lead site for chronic pacing but in some patients may cause impaired left ventricular (LV) systolic function over time. Comparisons with non-apical (RVNA) pacing sites have generated inconsistent results and recent meta-analyses have demonstrated unclear benefit due to heterogeneity across studies. A systematic search for randomized controlled trials that compared LVEF outcomes between RVNA and RVA pacing was performed up to October 2014. Twenty four studies (n = 1628 patients) met the inclusion criteria. To avoid between study heterogeneity two homogenous groups were created; group one where studies reported a difference (in favor of RVNA pacing) and group two where studies reported no difference between pacing sites. For group one weighted mean difference (WMD) between RVNA and RVA pacing in terms of LVEF at follow-up was 5.40% (95% CI: 3.94 to 6.87), related in part to group one's RVA arm demonstrating a significant reduction (mean loss -3.31%; 95% CI: -6.19 to -0.43) in LVEF between study baseline and end of follow-up. Neither of these finding were seen in group two. Weighted regression modeling demonstrated that inclusion of poor baseline LVEF (<40%) in combination with greater than 12 months follow-up was three times more common in group one compared to group two (weighted RR 2.82; 95% CI 1.03 - 7.72; P = 0.043). In patients requiring chronic right ventricular pacing where there is inclusion of impaired baseline LVEF (<40%), RVA pacing is associated with deterioration in LV function relative to RVNA pacing. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 63 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 13 20%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 6%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 17 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 54%
Psychology 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 19 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 June 2015.
All research outputs
#20,947,998
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Pacing & Clinical Electrophysiology
#2,549
of 3,292 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,229
of 275,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pacing & Clinical Electrophysiology
#14
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,292 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 275,858 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.