Impact of AV Conduction Disorders on SafeR Mode Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: CAN-SAVE R is a Canadian multicenter study that compares the effects of a new pacing mode algorithm designed to minimize right ventricular (V) pacing versus DDD mode with a long atrioventricular (AV) delay in a general population of pacemaker (PM) recipients. STUDY PARTICIPANTS: Patients with permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) or high-degree AV block (AVB) were excluded. We present preliminary data collected in 208 patients (mean age=71 +/- 11 years, 68% men), for the 2-month baseline period during which all PM were programmed in the new pacing mode. The pacing indications were sinus node disease (SND) without AVB in 39%, AVB without SND in 30%, SND and AVB in 16%, and miscellaneous in 15% of patients. RESULTS: The mean percent V pacing in the overall population was 9.5 +/- 23.8% (range=0-100%, median <1%), ranging between 0.5 +/- 1.5% (median=0) in patients without AVB and 18.7 +/- 31.2% in patients (median = 1) with AVB. Adverse events potentially related to the new pacing mode were observed in two patients with AVB. CONCLUSIONS: A new pacing mode was effective and safe in a general population of PM recipients without permanent AVB and was associated with an overall <1% median V pacing. CAN-SAVE R will compare the long-term effects of the new pacing mode with DDD with a long AV delay on clinical outcomes and cardiac function.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".