Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 854

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Biventricular Pacing for Atrioventricular Block and Systolic Dysfunction

Open access
Curtis, Anne B., Worley, Seth J., Adamson, Philip B., Chung, Eugene S., Niazi, Imran, Sherfesee, Lou, Shinn, Timothy, St. John Sutton, Martin·2013·New England Journal of Medicine
DOI 10.1056/nejmoa1210356
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Right ventricular pacing restores an adequate heart rate in patients with atrioventricular block, but high percentages of right ventricular apical pacing may promote left ventricular systolic dysfunction. We evaluated whether biventricular pacing might reduce mortality, morbidity, and adverse left ventricular remodeling in such patients. METHODS: We enrolled patients who had indications for pacing with atrioventricular block; New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I, II, or III heart failure; and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 50% or less. Patients received a cardiac-resynchronization pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) (the latter if the patient had an indication for defibrillation therapy) and were randomly assigned to standard right ventricular pacing or biventricular pacing. The primary outcome was the time to death from any cause, an urgent care visit for heart failure that required intravenous therapy, or a 15% or more increase in the left ventricular end-systolic volume index. RESULTS: Of 918 patients enrolled, 691 underwent randomization and were followed for an average of 37 months. The primary outcome occurred in 190 of 342 patients (55.6%) in the right-ventricular-pacing group, as compared with 160 of 349 (45.8%) in the biventricular-pacing group. Patients randomly assigned to biventricular pacing had a significantly lower incidence of the primary outcome over time than did those assigned to right ventricular pacing (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% credible interval, 0.60 to 0.90); results were similar in the pacemaker and ICD groups. Left ventricular lead-related complications occurred in 6.4% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Biventricular pacing was superior to conventional right ventricular pacing in patients with atrioventricular block and left ventricular systolic dysfunction with NYHA class I, II, or III heart failure. (Funded by Medtronic; BLOCK HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00267098.).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa1210356

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1999.tb00606.x · doi:10.1111/j.1540-8159.1999.tb00606.x
  2. 10.1053/eupc.2002.0238 · doi:10.1053/eupc.2002.0238

Cited by

See all 854

Metadata

Authors
Curtis, A. B., Worley, S. J., Adamson, P. B., Chung, E. S., Niazi, I., Sherfesee, L., Shinn, T., & St. John Sutton, M.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Publisher
Massachusetts Medical Society
Published
2013-04-25
Volume
368
Issue
17
Pages
1585-1593
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
DOI
10.1056/nejmoa1210356
OpenAlex
W2026768619
Cited by
854
References
14
FWCI
49.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Biventricular Pacing for Atrioventricular Block and Systolic Dysfunction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1210356
The paper
Curtis, A. B., Worley, S. J., Adamson, P. B., Chung, E. S., Niazi, I., Sherfesee, L., Shinn, T., & St. John Sutton, M. (2013). Biventricular Pacing for Atrioventricular Block and Systolic Dysfunction. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1210356

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.