SCIRP Mobile Website
Paper Submission

Why Us? >>

  • - Open Access
  • - Peer-reviewed
  • - Rapid publication
  • - Lifetime hosting
  • - Free indexing service
  • - Free promotion service
  • - More citations
  • - Search engine friendly

Free SCIRP Newsletters>>

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from SCIRP.


Contact Us >>

WhatsApp  +86 18163351462(WhatsApp)
Paper Publishing WeChat
Book Publishing WeChat

Article citations


Kirkfeldt, R.E., Johansen, J.B., Nohr, E.A., Moller, M., Arnsbo, P. and Nielsen, J.C. (2012) Pneumothorax in Cardiac Pacing: A Population-Based Cohort Study of 28,860 Danish Patients. Europace, 14, 1132-1138.

has been cited by the following article:

  • TITLE: Leadless Cardiac Pacemaker: Does Anatomical Position at Implant Affect Long-Term Electrical Performance?

    AUTHORS: John Ip, Abdul R. Safadi, Randy Ip, Matthew Gaskill, Rajesh Banker, Derek Exner, Srinivas Dukkipati, Mayer Rashtian, Imran Niazi

    KEYWORDS: Pacing Lead Location, Leadless Pacing, Lead Impedance, Pacing Threshold, R-Wave Amplitude

    JOURNAL NAME: Journal of Biomedical Science and Engineering, Vol.10 No.11, November 29, 2017

    ABSTRACT: Background: The Nanostim {trade mark, serif} Leadless Cardiac Pacemaker (LCP) has been shown to be safe and effective in human clinical trials. Since there is little information on the effect of implant location on LCP performance, the aim of this study was to determine whether anatomic position affects the long-term pacing performance of the LCP. Methods: Patients who enrolled in the Leadless II IDE Clinical Trial and had finished 6 months follow up (n = 479) were selected for the study. The implanting investigators determined the LCP final position under fluoroscope, which was categorized into three groups: RV apex (RVA, n = 174), RV apical septum (RVAS, n = 101), and RV septum (RVS, n = 204) (Figure 1). Data on capture threshold (at a 0.4 ms pulse width), R-wave amplitude and impedance were analyzed at implant, hospital discharge and 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months post-implant. Results: At implant, the mean capture thresholds in the RVA, RVAS and RVS were 0.77 ± 0.45, 0.81 ± 0.61 and 0.78 ± 0.59 volts, respectively. R-wave amplitudes were 8.0 ± 3.0 mV, 7.7 ± 2.9 mV and 7.6 ± 2.9 mV, respectively. Impedance values were 727 ± 311, 765 ± 333, and 677 ± 227 respectively. There were no differences among the 3 implant locations in capture threshold or R-wave amplitudes at 6 months (P > 0.06); however, all 3 performance parameters significantly improved over time (P