ReviewHeart failure reviews2017
Prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator in heart failure: the growing evidence for all or Primum non nocere for some?
Review in Heart failure reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Revascularization and Left Ventricular Dysfunction for ICD Eligibility.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Development and external validation of prognostic models to predict sudden and pump-failure death in patients with HFrEF from PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2021Article
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 at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heart failure (HF) is a common health problem and has reached epidemic in many western countries. Despite the current era of HF treatment, the risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in HF remains significant. Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) support has been shown to reduce the risk of SCD in patients with HF and impaired left ventricular function. Prophylactic ICD implantation in HF patients seems a logical step to reduce mortality through a reduction in SCD. However, ICD implantation is an invasive procedure, and both short- and long-term complications can occur. This needs to be carefully considered when evaluating the risk-benefit ratio of ICD implantation for individual patients. As the severity of HF increases, the proportion of SCD compared with HF-related deaths decreases. The challenge lies in identifying patients with HF who are at significant risk of SCD and who would most benefit from an ICD in addition to other anti-arrhythmic strategies. This review offers insight on the applicability and practicability of ICD for this growing population.
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.