ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2018
Prediction of clinical outcome in patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy - the role of NT-ProBNP and a combined response score.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01949246 (Analysis of Circulating Biomarkers in Predicting Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy), which is not on this 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.
Analysis of Circulating Biomarkers in Predicting Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) With Biventricular Pacing in Patients With Congestive Heart Failure (BIOCRT)
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Synergistic Value of Combined Electrical, Structural, and Functional Response Metrics in the Prediction of Long-Term Event-Free Survival After Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Review.JAMA · 2026Review
- Harmonizing Heartbeats: The Mosaic of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Responders-A Comprehensive Exploration of Diverse Criteria and Predictors.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- The Prognostic Role of Global Longitudinal Strain and NT-proBNP in Heart Failure Patients Receiving Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Risk scores in cardiac resynchronization therapy-A review of the literature.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Intracardiac conduction time as a predictor of cardiac resynchronization therapy response: Results of the BIO|SELECT pilot study.Heart rhythm O2 · 2021Article
- A novel risk model for mortality and hospitalization following cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy: the alpha-score.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2020Observational
- Echocardiographic Assessment of Right Ventriculo-arterial Coupling: Clinical Correlates and Prognostic Impact in Heart Failure Patients Undergoing Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.Journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2020Article
- Article
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
backgroundCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established therapy for appropriately selected patients with heart failure. Response to CRT has been heterogeneously defined using both clinical and echocardiographic measures, with poor correlation between the two.
methodsThe study cohort was comprised of 202 CRT-treated patients and CRT response was defined at 6 months post-implant. Echocardiographic response (E+) was defined as a reduction in LVESV ≥ 15%, clinical response as an improvement of ≥ 1 NYHA class (C+), and biomarker response as a ≥ 25% reduction in NT-proBNP(B+). The association of response measures (E+, B+, C+; response score range 0-3) and clinical endpoints at 3 years was assessed in landmarked Cox models.
resultsEcho and clinical responders demonstrated greater declines in NT-proBNP than non-responders (median [E+/B+]: -52%, [E+]: -27%, [C+]: -39% and [E-/C-]: -13%; p = 0.01 for trend). Biomarker (HR 0.43 [95% CI: 0.22-0.86], p = 0.02) and clinical (HR 0.40 [0.23-0.70] p = 0.001) response were associated with a significantly reduced risk of the primary endpoint. When integrating each response measure into a composite score, each 1 point increase was associated with a 31% decreased risk for a composite endpoint of mortality, LVAD, transplant and HF hospitalization (HR 0.69 [95% CI: 0.50-0.96], p = 0.03), and a 52% decreased risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.48 [95% CI: 0.26-0.89], p = 0.02).
conclusionSerial changes in NT-proBNP are associated with clinical outcomes following CRT implant. Integration of biomarker, clinical, and echocardiographic response may discriminate CRT responders versus non-responders in a clinically meaningful way, and with higher accuracy.
trial registrationThe cohort was combined from study NCT01949246 and the study based on local review board approval 2011/550 in Lund, Sweden.
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.