Long-Term Efficacy of Cardiac Pacemakers and Implantable Cardioverter/Defibrillators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac pacemakers and implantable cardioverter/defibrillators are becoming more common due to expanded indications and increasing patient survival. In addition, these device systems are being implanted in younger patients, which increases their necessity for long-term durability. Device adverse events can be seen early, during or following implantation (perforation, lead dislodgement, infection), or late (lead fraction, insulation failure or device system infection). These adverse events can, at least in part, be attributed to intrinsic device system structure. Since the initial pacemakers and implantable cardioverter/defibrillators, many modifications in both device system hardware and software have been made to enhance both their durability and function. The current era of devices appear to have made adjustments for previous inadequacies and promise to be reliable and to function well. Despite this, however, it is necessary for clinicians to be aware of possible malfunctions, their warning signs, and the appropriate course of action should these malfunctions be encountered. In this review we describe the common device system malfunctions and device system insertion complications.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".