Key result
Implanting an implantable cardiac monitor at the recommended V2-V3 position yielded a higher proportion of adequate R-wave amplitudes compared to other locations (79% vs 46%, P<0.05).
Why the study?
Does an ICM implant at the V2-V3 position at a 45° angle without preimplant mapping provide adequate R-wave sensing compared to other implant locations?
Observational (n=41)
Yes
Does an ICM implant at the V2-V3 position at a 45° angle without preimplant mapping provide adequate R-wave sensing compared to other implant locations?
Absolute Event Rate: 79% vs 46%
p-value: p=<0.05
Implanting an ICM at the V2-V3 position at a 45° angle provides adequate R-wave sensing, suggesting that routine preimplant mapping may not be necessary.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
V2-V3 ICM placement was associated with better R-wave sensing; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before changing mapping practice.
Krahn et al. (2013) conducted an observational in Scheduled for implantable cardiac monitor (n=41). ICM implant at recommended V2-V3 position vs. Other implant locations was evaluated on Proportion of ICM R-wave counts of amplitude 0.25-1.2 mV (p=<0.05). Implanting an implantable cardiac monitor at the recommended V2-V3 position yielded a higher proportion of adequate R-wave amplitudes compared to other locations (79% vs 46%, P<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: