ArticleAmerican journal of cardiovascular disease2020
Evaluation of super-responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy in the presence of left bundle branch block and absence of scar in the posterolateral wall of the left ventricle.
Article in American journal of cardiovascular disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in patients with left bundle branch block: Patterns of dyssynchrony and implications for late gadolinium enhancement imaging.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with heart failure (HF) undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) who exhibit above-expected improvement are known as super-responders. We assessed the rate of super-responders in a population with left bundle branch block (LBBB) > 150 ms in the absence of scar tissue in the left ventricular posterolateral wall as well as prognostic variables. In this prospective observational cohort study (n=20) an electrocardiogram (ECG) was performed pre- and post-CRT. The classic and Strauss LBBB criteria were adopted (> 150 ms). The percent (%) reduction of the QRS was calculated after implantation. All patients responded to the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire and underwent an echocardiogram to measure left ventricular ejection function (LVEF), left atrium (LA) diameter, left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVEDV), left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVESV), and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) pre- and 6 months post-CRT. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measured the presence of scar tissue in the posterolateral LV wall and the total scar burden (% LV mass). Fisher's exact test and the Mann-Whitney test were performed to evaluate possible prognostic variables. The mean age was 58.20±8.79 years old, 60% female, with a mean LVEF of 28.15±5.10%, ECG with LBBB mean QRS of 162.15±7.86 ms, LBBB > 150 ms with Strauss standard in 90% of cases, and 90% with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. Twelve cases (60%) of super-responders (reduction > 30% LVESV after 6 months) were observed. Super-responders did not present a difference in response in sex (12 vs 8 P=0.67), age (58.67 vs 57.7 P=087), Minnesota quality of life (55.50 vs 67.70 P=0.2), % initial QRS reduction (21.16 vs 18.69 P=0.21), LVEF (29.25 vs 26.5 P=0.38), LVEDD (66.33 vs 67.67 P=0.83), LVEDV (211.16 vs 228.53 P=0.75), LVESV (145.83 vs 167.00 P=0.75), or LA diameter (41.58 vs 43.63 P=0.45). The presence of LBBB > 150 ms, using the Strauss standard (90%) and the absence of scar in the posterolateral wall may account for these positive results. Super-responders benefit the most from CRT, and the results of this study can contribute to a better selection of CRT candidates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32411502PMC7218684W3026256070What 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.