SynthesisCurrent cardiology reports2019
For Whom the Bell Tolls : Refining Risk Assessment for Sudden Cardiac Death.
Synthesis in Current cardiology reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- [(LV)EF is a poor predictor of sudden cardiac death : Pro/Contra].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2024Review
- A Review of the Commercially Available ECG Detection and Transmission Systems-The Fuzzy Logic Approach in the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Arrest.Micromachines · 2021Review
- Elevated plasma levels of asymmetric dimethylarginine and the risk for arrhythmic death in ischemic and non-ischemic, dilated cardiomyopathy - A prospective, controlled long-term study.Clinical biochemistry · 2020Observational
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sudden cardiac death is one of the most important causes of death worldwide. Advancements in medical treatment, percutaneous interventions, and device therapy (ICD and CRTD) showed consistent reduction in mortality, mainly in survivors of SCD and in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and depressed left ventricular function. Patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathies, mildly reduced LV function, and channelopathies have increased risk for SCD. Identifying the subgroup of these patients before they experience life-threatening or fatal events is essential to further improve outcomes. In this review, we aimed to summarize the current knowledge for risk stratification and primary prevention, to describe the gaps in evidence, and to discuss future directions for screening and treating patients at risk for SCD. PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive description of the etiologies of sudden cardiac death, risk stratification strategies, and to describe the current medical and interventional therapies. We aimed to discuss the current gaps in our knowledge of primary prevention of SCD and to review novel approaches and interventions. RECENT
findingsThe incidence of SCD has decreased in the last two decades due to improved pharmacological treatment and ICD implantation in SCD survivors and in patients with reduced left ventricular function and ischemic cardiomyopathy. The efficacy of ICD in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy is challenged by new findings from the DANISH trial. Catheter ablation is new emerging strategy to prevent SCD in patients with scar relater or PVC-triggered ventricular arrhythmias. Despite the new treatments, SCD is still a major burden. ICD remains the cornerstone for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, whereas appropriate risk stratification of the patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and channelopathies is needed to further improve outcomes. The future of ablation as the treatment and prevention of SCD remains to be studied.
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.