ArticleHeart Asia2016
Usefulness of cardiac resynchronisation therapy devices and implantable cardioverter defibrillators in the treatment of heart failure due to severe systolic dysfunction: systematic review of clinical trials and network meta-analysis.
Article in Heart Asia, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo assess the effectiveness of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT), implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy, and the combination of these devices (CRT+ICD) in adult patients with left ventricular dysfunction and symptomatic heart failure.
methodsA comprehensive systematic review of randomised clinical trials was conducted. Several electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane, ClinicalTrials.gov) were reviewed. The mortality rates between treatments were compared. A network was established comparing the various options, and direct, indirect and mixed comparisons were made using multivariate meta-regression. The degree of clinical and statistical homogeneity was assessed.
results43 trials involving 13 017 patients were reviewed. Resynchronisation therapy, defibrillators, and combined devices (CRT+ICD) are clearly beneficial compared to optimal medical treatment, showing clear benefit in all of these cases. In a theoretical order of efficiency, the first option is combined therapy (CRT+ICD), the second is CRT, and the third is defibrillator implantation (ICD). Given the observational nature of these comparisons, and the importance of the overlapping CIs, we cannot state that the combined option (CRT+ICD) offers superior survival benefit compared to the other two options.
conclusionsThe combined option of CRT+ICD seems to be better than the option of CRT alone, although no clear improvement in survival was found for the combined option. It would be advisable to perform a direct comparative study of these two options.
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.