MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408416330 · doi:10.1016/j.hrthm.2025.03.1941

Dual-chamber leadless pacemaker implant procedural outcomes: Insights from the AVEIR DR i2i study

2025· article· en· W4408416330 on OpenAlexaff
Rahul N. Doshi, James E. Ip, Pascal Defaye, Vivek Y. Reddy, Derek V. Exner, Robert C. Canby, Morio Shoda, Maria Grazia Bongiorni, Gerhard Hindricks, Petr Neužil, Thomas Callahan, Sri Sundaram, Daniel Booth, Louis‐Philippe Richer, Nima Badie, Reinoud E. Knops

Bibliographic record

VenueHeart Rhythm · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical Centre
FundersAbbott PharmaceuticalsAbbott Laboratories
KeywordsMedicineSingle chamberImplantCardiologyDual (grammatical number)Internal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Initial results were recently reported for the AVEIR DR i2i study, which involved the percutaneous implantation of a novel dual-chamber leadless pacemaker (LP) system, with right atrial and right ventricular LPs delivering atrioventricular synchronous pacing. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate procedural outcomes and learning curve for de novo implantation of the dual-chamber LP (AVEIR DR, Abbott, Abbott Park, IL). METHODS: Implant procedure metrics collected during the study were analyzed, including procedural complications within 30 days of implantation. Procedural outcomes were evaluated according to implanter experience: 1-4 vs 9+ dual-chamber LP implant procedures (ie, initial vs advanced implant experience). RESULTS: De novo dual-chamber LPs were successfully implanted in 446 of 452 patients (99%) by 126 physicians. Mean procedural duration metrics included 90±37 minutes of introducer sheath insertion-to-removal time, 74±32 minutes of dual-chamber procedure duration, 26±17 minutes of right ventricular LP procedure duration, 42±24 minutes of right atrial LP procedure duration, and 20±13 minutes of fluoroscopy duration; between initial and advanced implant experience, there were reductions of 19%-36% (P<.05) in these duration metrics. There were 62 procedural complications in 50 of 452 patients (11.1%) (ie, 88.9% complication free), predominantly involving cardiac arrhythmias (ie, atrial fibrillation/flutter or complete atrioventricular block; 16 of 452 [3.5%]). Freedom from complications significantly improved from 89% to 98% of patients (P<.05) when comparing initial and advanced implant experience. CONCLUSION: In a pivotal investigational study, implantation of a dual-chamber LP system was successful in 99% of patients. Advanced implant experience was accompanied by improvements in procedural outcomes including reduced procedural times (introducer sheath insertion to removal, dual-chamber procedure, ventricular LP and atrial LP procedures, and fluoroscopy) and improved freedom from complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05252702.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeart RhythmSame topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesFrench-language works237,207