ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2024
Incidence, Risk Factors, and Outcomes of Left Atrial Enlargement in Patients Requiring Right Ventricular Pacing: A Retrospective Study of 461 Cases from 2012 to 2020.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Risk of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Conduction System Pacing Versus Right Ventricular Pacing: A Meta-Analysis.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Left Atrial Appendage Thrombus and Dense Spontaneous Echo Contrast in Anticoagulated Atrial Fibrillation Patients Referred for Cardioversion: Beyond CHAJournal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Statins and Pacing-Induced Atrial Myopathy: Unraveling Their Role in Atrioventricular Block Patients with Permanent Pacemakers.International journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Long-term right ventricular (RV) pacing has been linked to left atrial enlargement (LAE). The incidence and risk factors associated with significant LAE after RV pacing remain unknown. This retrospective study included 461 patients requiring RV pacing at 2 centers between 2012 and 2020 and aimed to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, outcomes, and complications of LAE. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 461 patients with normal-sized pre-implant left atrial dimension and dual-chamber pacing pacemaker implantation for complete atrioventricular block were enrolled. Patients were grouped based on a ≥20% increase from their baseline left atrial dimension by echocardiography, indicating significant LAE, and initial characteristics, echocardiographic data, and outcomes were compared. RESULTS During a mean 7.0±4.9 years follow-up period, 96 patients (20.8%) developed significant LAE, whereas 365 patients did not. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, smaller pre-implant left atrial dimension (OR, 0.776; 95% CI, 0.728-0.828; P<0.001), lower post-implant left ventricular ejection fraction (OR, 0.976; 95% CI, 0.957-0.995; P=0.014), post-implant development of moderate to severe mitral regurgitation (OR, 2.357; 95% CI, 1.172-4.740; P=0.016), and RV pacing duration ≥3.3 years (OR, 1.576; 95% CI, 1.039-2.646; P=0.045) were independent predictors of significant LAE after RV-dependent pacing. There was a significant difference in the incident stroke events between patients without and with significant LAE (9.9% vs 17.7%; log-rank P=0.047). CONCLUSIONS Long-term RV pacing was linked to significant LAE in 20.8% of patients with complete atrioventricular block, with those affected experiencing a higher stroke rate during follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.