ArticleArchives of medical science : AMS2018
Risk factors and prognostic role of an electrical storm in patients after myocardial infarction with an implanted ICD for secondary prevention.
Article in Archives of medical science : AMS, 2018. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and Laboratory Predictors of Long-Term Outcomes after Catheter Ablation for a Ventricular Electrical Storm.Journal of interventional cardiology · 2024Article
- 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of our study was to determine the risk factors for electrical storm (ES) and to assess the impact of ES on the long-term prognosis in patients after myocardial infarction (MI) with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). MATERIAL AND
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 416 patients with coronary artery disease after MI who had an implanted ICD for secondary prevention of SCD. Fifty (12%) patients had one or more incidents of an electrical storm - the ES (+) group. We matched the reference group of 47 patients from 366 ES (-) patients.
resultsWe analyzed 3,408 episodes of ventricular arrhythmias: 3,148 ventricular tachyarrhythmic episodes in the ES (+) group (including 187 episodes of ES) and 260 in the ES (-) group. Multivariate logistic regression showed that inferior wall MI (RR = 3.98, 95% CI: 1.52-10.41) and the absence of coronary revascularization (RR = 2.92, 95% CI: 1.18-7.21) were independent predictors of ES (
conclusionsElectrical storm in patients after MI with ICD for secondary prevention is a relatively common phenomenon and has a negative prognostic significance. Myocardial infarction of the inferior wall and the absence of coronary revascularization are predisposing factors for the occurrence of an ES.
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.