ArticleClinical cardiology2018
Long-term results of combined cardiac contractility modulation and subcutaneous defibrillator therapy in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.
Article in Clinical cardiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiac Contractility Modulation and Arrhythmic Burden in Heart Failure: Mechanistic Rationale, Clinical Evidence, and Future Perspectives.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Cardiac Contractility Modulation: a Novel Adjunctive Therapy for Heart Failure Patients Undergoing Treatment with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- First Human Implant With Cardiac Contractility Modulation in a Patient With an Extravascular Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator.JACC. Case reports · 2025Article
- Cardiac contractility modulation in patients with heart failure - A review of the literature.Heart failure reviews · 2024Review
- Enhancing myocardial function with cardiac contractility modulation: potential and challenges.ESC heart failure · 2024Review
- Cardiac contractility modulation attenuates structural and electrical remodeling in a chronic heart failure rabbit model.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Article
- [Device-device interaction].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2019Review
- [Cardiac contractility modulation for treatment of chronic heart failure].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2018Review
- Long-term results of combined cardiac contractility modulation and subcutaneous defibrillator therapy in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.Clinical cardiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiac contractility modulation (CCM) is an electrical-device therapy for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% also have indication for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), and in some cases subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is selected. HYPOTHESIS: CCM and S-ICD can be combined to work efficaciously and safely.
methodsWe report on 20 patients with HFrEF and LVEF ≤35% who received CCM and S-ICD. To exclude device interference, patients received intraoperative crosstalk testing, S-ICD testing, and bicycle exercise testing while CCM was activated. Clinical and QOL measures before CCM activation and at last follow-up were analyzed. S-ICD performance was evaluated while both CCM and S-ICD were active.
resultsMean follow-up was 34.3 months. NYHA class improved from 2.9 ± 0.4 to 2.1 ± 0.7 (P < 0.0001), Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire score improved from 50.2 ± 23.7 to 29.6 ± 22.8 points (P < 0.0001), and LVEF improved from 24.4% ± 8.1% to 30.9% ± 9.6% (P = 0.002). Mean follow-up time with both devices active was 22 months. Three patients experienced a total of 6 episodes of sustained ventricular tachycardia, all successfully treated with first ICD shock. One case received an inappropriate shock unrelated to the concomitant CCM. One patient received an LVAD, so CCM and S-ICD were discontinued.
conclusionsCCM and S-ICD can be successfully combined in patients with HFrEF. S-ICD and CCM remain efficacious when used together, with no interference affecting their function.
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.