SynthesisFrontiers in genetics2019
Differences in Short QT Syndrome Subtypes: A Systematic Literature Review and Pooled Analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in genetics, 2019. 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.
- Broad Electrocardiogram Syndromes Spectrum: From Common Emergencies to Particular Electrical Heart Disorders-Part II.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The Uncommon Phenomenon of Short QT Syndrome: A Scoping Review of the Literature.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Beneficial normalization of cardiac repolarization by carnitine in transgenic short QT syndrome type 1 rabbit models.Cardiovascular research · 2024Article
- Human Genetics of Cardiac Arrhythmias.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024Review
- European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)/Heart Rhythm Society (HRS)/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS)/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS) Expert Consensus Statement on the state of genetic testing for cardiac diseases.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2022Article
- European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)/Heart Rhythm Society (HRS)/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS)/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS) Expert Consensus Statement on the state of genetic testing for cardiac diseases.Journal of arrhythmia · 2022Article
- Atrial Fibrillation in Inherited Channelopathies.Cardiac electrophysiology clinics · 2021Review
- Transcriptomic uniqueness and commonality of the ion channels and transporters in the four heart chambers.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, and inherited arrhythmia syndromes.Heart rhythm · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundShort QT syndrome (SQTS) is a rare syndrome and affects different types of genes. However, data on differences of clinical profile and outcome of different SQTS types are sparse.
methodsWe conducted a pooled analysis of 110 SQTS patients. Patients have been diagnosed between 2000 and 2017 at our institution (n = 12) and revealed using a literature review (n = 98). 29 studies were identified by analysing systematic data bases (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Libary, Cinahl).
results67 patients with genotype positive SQTS origin and 43 patients with genotype negative origin were found. A significant difference is documented between the sex with a higher predominance of male in genotype negative SQTS patients and predominance of females in genotype positive SQTS patients (male 52% versus 84%, female 45% versus 14%; p = 0.0016). No relevant difference of their median age (genotype positive 27 ± 19 versus genotype negative 29 ± 15; p = 0.48) was found. Asymptomatic patients and patients reporting symptoms such as syncope, sudden cardiac death, atrial flutter and ventricular fibrillation documented in both groups were similar except atrial fibrillation (genotype positive 19% versus genotype negative 0%; p = 0.0055). The QTc interval was not significantly different in both groups (genotype positive 315 ± 32 versus genotype negative 320 ± 19; p = 0.30). The treatments (medical treatment and ICD implantation) in both groups were comparable. Electrophysiology studies were not significantly higher documented in patients with genotype positive and negative origin (24% versus 9%; p = 0.075). Events at follow up such as VT, VF, and SCD were not higher presented in patients with genotype positive (13% versus 9%) (p = 0.25). 54% of genotype positive SQTS patients showed SQTS 1 followed by STQS 2 (21%) and SQTS 3 (10%).
conclusionsThe long-term risk of a malignant arrhythmic event is not higher in patients with genotype positive. However, patients with genotype positive present themselves more often with AF with a female predominance. Also, other events at follow up such as syncope, atrial flutter and palpitation were not significantly higher (9% versus 0%; p = 0.079).
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.