ReviewCardiology research2020
Indications of Cardiac Resynchronization in Non-Left Bundle Branch Block: Clinical Review of Available Evidence.
Review in Cardiology research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Intraventricular Blocks on Cardiac Cycle Dynamics: An Echocardiographic and Vectorcardiographic Analysis.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Article
- Review
- Cardiac resynchronization therapy in a patient with Ebstein's anomaly and left ventricular noncompaction: Rethink the resync?HeartRhythm case reports · 2022Article
- Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Simultaneous and Sequential Multi-Point Pacing in Heart Failure Patients With an Expected Higher Rate of Sub-response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: Results of Multicenter SYNSEQ Study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Comparison between conduction system pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy in right bundle branch block patients.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) benefits have been firmly established in patients with heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF), who remain in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional classes II and III, despite optimal medical therapy, and have a wide QRS complex. An important and consistent finding in published systematic reviews and in subgroup analyses is that the benefits of CRT are maximum for patients with a broader QRS durations, typically described as QRS duration > 150 ms, and for patients with a typical left bundle branch block (LBBB) QRS morphology. It remains uncertain whether patients with non-LBBB QRS complex morphology clearly benefit from CRT or only modestly respond.
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.