Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 194

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Canadian Trial of Physiological Pacing: Effects of Physiological Pacing During Long-Term Follow-Up

Kerr, Charles R., Connolly, Stuart J., Abdollah, Hoshiar, Roberts, Robin S., Gent, Michael, Yusuf, Salim, Gillis, Anne M., Tang, Anthony S.L., Talajic, Mario, Klein, George J., Newman, David M.·2004·Circulation

Abstract

Background— The Canadian Trial of Physiological Pacing (CTOPP) reported that the risk of stroke or cardiovascular death was similar between patients receiving ventricular versus physiological pacemakers at the end of the original follow-up period of 3 years. However, the occurrence of atrial fibrillation was significantly less frequent with physiological pacemakers. To assess a potential delayed benefit of physiological pacing, follow-up of patients in this study was extended to 6 years. Methods and Results— A total of 1474 patients requiring a pacemaker for symptomatic bradycardia were randomized to receive ventricular and 1094 to physiological pacemakers. The primary outcome was stroke or cardiovascular death. The study was completed in July 1998, and follow-up was extended to July 2001. At a mean follow-up of 6.4 years, there was no difference between treatment groups in the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or stroke. There was no significant difference in total mortality or stroke between groups. There was a significantly lower rate of development of atrial fibrillation in the physiological group, with a relative risk reduction of 20.1% (CI, 5.4 to 32.5; P =0.009). Conclusions— The CTOPP extended study does not show a difference in cardiovascular death or stroke, or in total mortality, or in stroke between patients implanted with ventricular or physiological pacemakers over a mean follow-up of >6 years. However, there is a persistent significant reduction in the development of atrial fibrillation with physiological pacing.

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 · 10.1161/01.cir.0000109490.72104.ee

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 194

Metadata

Authors
Kerr, C. R., Connolly, S. J., Abdollah, H., Roberts, R. S., Gent, M., Yusuf, S., Gillis, A. M., Tang, A. S. L., Talajic, M., Klein, G. J., & Newman, D. M.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2004-01-27
Volume
109
Issue
3
Pages
357-362
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2157843325
Cited by
194
References
3
FWCI
14.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Canadian Trial of Physiological Pacing: Effects of Physiological Pacing During Long-Term Follow-Up. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.0000109490.72104.ee
The paper
Kerr, C. R., Connolly, S. J., Abdollah, H., Roberts, R. S., Gent, M., Yusuf, S., Gillis, A. M., Tang, A. S. L., Talajic, M., Klein, G. J., & Newman, D. M. (2004). Canadian Trial of Physiological Pacing: Effects of Physiological Pacing During Long-Term Follow-Up. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.0000109490.72104.ee

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.