ReviewJournal of cardiovascular translational research2012
Clinical, laboratory, and pacing predictors of CRT response.
Review in Journal of cardiovascular translational research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Reduced appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy after cardiac resynchronization therapy-induced left ventricular function recovery: a meta-analysis and systematic review.European heart journal · 2015Pooled it
- New Frontiers of microRNA in Heart Failure: From Clinical Risk to Therapeutic Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Conduction system pacing on track to replace CRT? Review of current evidence and prospects of conduction system pacing.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Sex-Specific Differences in Ventricular Remodeling and Response After Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.The American journal of cardiology · 2022Article
- Comparative effects of left bundle branch area pacing, His bundle pacing, biventricular pacing in patients requiring cardiac resynchronization therapy: A network meta-analysis.Clinical cardiology · 2022Article
- Short QRS Duration After His-Purkinje Conduction System Pacing Predicts Left Ventricular Complete Reverse Remodeling in Patients With True Left Bundle Branch Block and Heart Failure.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy-Emerging Therapeutic Approaches.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2018Review
- Guidewire Method for Measuring Local Left Ventricular Electrical Activation Time During Cardiac Resynchronization Implantation.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2018Article
- Predictors of mortality, LVAD implant, or heart transplant in primary prevention cardiac resynchronization therapy recipients: The HF-CRT score.Heart rhythm · 2015Observational
- Development and Validation of Predictive Models of Cardiac Mortality and Transplantation in Resynchronization Therapy.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2015Observational
- Guidelines for translational research in heart failure.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2015Article
- Cardiac sympathetic innervation and cardiac resynchronization therapy.Heart failure reviews · 2014Review
- Mechanical dyssynchrony precedes QRS widening in ATP-sensitive K⁺ channel-deficient dilated cardiomyopathy.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A decade of research has established the role of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in medically refractory, moderate to severe systolic heart failure (HF) with intraventricular conduction delay. CRT is an electrical therapy instituted to reestablish ventricular synchronization in order to improve cardiac function and favorably modulate the neurohormonal system. CRT confers a mortality benefit, improved HF hospitalizations, and functional outcome in this population, but not all patients consistently demonstrate a positive CRT response. The nonresponder rate varies from 20% to 40%, depending on the defined response criteria. Efforts to improve response to CRT have focused on a number of fronts. Methods to optimize the correction of electrical and mechanical dyssynchrony, which is the primary target of CRT, has been the focus of research, in addition to improving patient selection and optimizing post-implant care. However, a major issue in dealing with improving nonresponse rates has been finding an accurate and generally accepted definition of "response" itself. The availability of a standard consensus definition of CRT response would enable the estimation of nonresponder burden accurately and permit the development of strategies to improve CRT response. In this review, we define various aspects of "response" to CRT and outline variability in the definition criteria and the problems with its inconsistencies. We describe clinical, laboratory, and pacing predictors that influence CRT response and outcome and how to optimize response.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22362181What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.