ArticleNetherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation2016
Echo response and clinical outcome in CRT patients.
Article in Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Harmonizing Heartbeats: The Mosaic of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Responders-A Comprehensive Exploration of Diverse Criteria and Predictors.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- A nomogram for predicting CRT response based on multi-parameter features.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Article
- Progress in Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy and Optimisation.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Review
- Regional contributions to left ventricular stroke volume determined by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in cardiac resynchronization therapy.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2021Article
- Left-ventricular dyssynchrony in viable myocardium by myocardial perfusion SPECT is predictive of mechanical response to CRT.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2021Article
- Cardiogoniometry can predict positive response to cardiac resynchronization therapy - A proof of concept study.Indian heart journal · 2018Article
- Echocardiographic markers of dyssynchrony as predictors of super-response to cardiac resynchronisation therapy - a pilot study.Cardiovascular ultrasound · 2018Article
- The Role of Echocardiography in the Optimization of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.The open cardiovascular medicine journal · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChange in left ventricular end-systolic volume (∆LVESV) is the most frequently used surrogate marker in measuring response to cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT). We investigated whether ∆LVESV is the best measure to discriminate between a favourable and unfavourable outcome and whether this is equally applicable to non-ischaemic and ischaemic cardiomyopathy.
methods205 CRT patients (age 65 ± 12 years, 69 % men) were included. At baseline and 6 months echocardiographic studies, exercise testing and laboratory measurements were performed. CRT response was assessed by: ∆LVESV, ∆LV ejection fraction (LVEF), ∆ interventricular mechanical delay, ∆VO2 peak, ∆VE/VCO2, ∆BNP, ∆creatinine, ∆NYHA, and ∆QRS. These were correlated to the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) between 6 and 24 months.
resultsMACE occurred in 19 % of the patients (non-ischaemic: 13 %, ischaemic: 24 %). ∆LVESV remained the only surrogate marker for CRT response for the total population and patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy, showing areas under the curve (AUC) of 0.69 and 0.850, respectively. For ischaemic cardiomyopathy, ∆BNP was the best surrogate marker showing an AUC of 0.66.
conclusion∆LVESV is an excellent surrogate marker measuring CRT response concerning long-term outcome for non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy. ∆LVESV is not suitable for ischaemic cardiomyopathy in which measuring CRT response remains difficult.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.