ArticleCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2017
Implantable cardioverter defibrillator in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- The mortality for the implantable cardiac defibrillator in nonischemic cardiomyopathy: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical cardiology · 2022Pooled it
- Implantable cardiac defibrillators for people with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Cardioverter-defibrillator reduces mortality risk in eligible ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy patients: Sub-analysis of the multi-center Improve SCA study.Indian heart journalTrial
- Implantable Cardiac Devices in Patients with Brady- and Tachy-Arrhythmias: An Update of the Literature.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Implantable defibrillator therapy and mortality in patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy : An updated meta-analysis and effect on Dutch clinical practice by the Task Force of the Dutch Society of Cardiology.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2023Review
- Tongmai Yangxin Pill combined with metoprolol or metoprolol alone for the treatment of symptomatic premature ventricular complex: a multicenter, randomized, parallel-controlled clinical study.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2022Article
- Should Primary Prevention ICDs Still Be Placed in Patients with Non-ischemic Cardiomyopathy? A Review of the Evidence.Current cardiology reports · 2018Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSudden cardiac death (SCD) is a significant cause of mortality in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are currently indicated for the primary prevention of SCD in these patients. Conflicting results from published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have recently questioned the protective role of ICD in NICM patients to perform an updated meta-analysis of the effect of ICDs on outcomes of NICM patients.
methodsWe performed a search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for RCTs comparing ICD to medical therapy in patients with NICM. Outcomes were all-cause mortality, SCD, and cardiac mortality. Mantel-Haenszel (MH) risk ratios (RR) were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis for the outcomes mentioned. Heterogeneity was assessed using I
resultsA total of five RCTs met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 1,503 patients in the ICD group and 1,364 patients in the medical therapy. Compared to medical therapy, ICD use resulted in a 24% relative risk reduction (RRR) of all-cause mortality (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.91, P=0.002), and 60% RRR of SCD (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.18-0.90, P=0.03), but was not associated with a statistically significant benefit in the prevention of cardiac mortality (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.39-1.44, P=0.39). Limiting the analysis to patients who received an ICD only without cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) pacemakers (4 trials, 1,825 patients) showed similar all-cause mortality results with 24% RRR in ICD group (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.61-0.94, P=0.01).
conclusionsICD therapy reduces all-cause mortality and SCD in patients with NICM.
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.