Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24093855›Full record

Trial reportAmerican heart journal2013

Failure to reassess ejection fraction after acute myocardial infarction in potential implantable cardioverter/defibrillator candidates: insights from the Translational Research Investigating Underlying disparities in acute Myocardial infarction Patients' Health Status (TRIUMPH) registry.

Amy Leigh Miller, Kensey Gosch, Stacie L Daugherty, Saif Rathore, Pamela N Peterson, Eric D Peterson, P Michael Ho, Paul S Chan, David E Lanfear, John A Spertus and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in American heart journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Sudden cardiac death while waiting: do we need the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator?Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2022
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Amy Leigh MillerBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA. Electronic address: almiller@partners.org.
Kensey Gosch
Stacie L Daugherty
Saif Rathore
Pamela N Peterson
Eric D Peterson
P Michael Ho
Paul S Chan
David E Lanfear
John A Spertus
Tracy Y Wang
Saint Luke's Hospital · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · USClinical Research Institute · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USHenry Ford Hospital · USYale University · US

Funding

SCCOR in Cardiac Dysfunction and DiseaseP50HL077113 · NHLBI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI CAIN, MICHAEL E · 2005 to 2009
$13.4M
Gender Disparities in Invasive CVD Procedure Use: the Role of Provider BiasK08HL103776 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI DAUGHERTY, STACIE LUTHER · 2010 to 2014
$657k
The Appropriateness Criteria for Coronary Revascularization: Feasibility of MeasuK23HL102224 · NHLBI · SAINT LUKE'S HOSPITAL · PI CHAN, PAUL SHEUNG-YAN · 2010 to 2014
$610k
NHLBI NIH HHS K08 HL103776NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL102224NHLBI NIH HHS P50 HL077113
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent practice guidelines advocate delaying assessment of primary prevention implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD) candidacy at least 40 days after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) because early ICD implantation after AMI has not demonstrated survival benefit. The rate at which interval reassessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) occurs in potential primary prevention ICD candidates is unknown.

methodsWe examined patients with AMI in the TRIUMPH registry with inhospital LVEF <40% discharged alive after their index presentation, excluding patients with a prior ICD and those who declined ICD during the index admission or were discharged to hospice. We conducted multivariable Poisson modeling to identify independent factors associated with LVEF reassessment by 6 months after AMI.

resultsOf the 533 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, only 187 (35.1%) reported LVEF reassessment in the first 6 months after AMI and only 13 patients (2.4%) underwent ICD implantation by 1 year. In multivariable analysis, early cardiology follow-up after AMI was associated with a higher likelihood of LVEF reassessment (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval 1.06-1.28), whereas uninsured status and cardiologist-driving inpatient medical decision making were associated with a lower likelihood of LVEF reassessment (odds ratios 0.84 [95% CI 0.74-0.96] and 0.78 [95% CI 0.68-0.91], respectively).

conclusionsIn contemporary practice, almost 2 of 3 potential primary prevention ICD candidates did not report follow-up LVEF evaluation, with a very low rate of ICD implantation at 1 year. These results suggest an important gap in quality, highlighting the need for better transitions of care.

Indexed as

Defibrillators, ImplantableRegistriesRisk AssessmentDeath, Sudden, CardiacFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionOdds RatioPatient DischargePrimary PreventionRetrospective StudiesRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID24093855
PMCPMC3801420
OpenAlexW1999744059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.