ReviewCurrent heart failure reports2020
CRT-Pacemaker Versus CRT-Defibrillator Who Needs Sudden Cardiac Death Protection?
Review in Current heart failure reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of the reviewPatients with cardiomyopathy and impaired left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction are at risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). In selected heart failure patients, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) provides LV reverse remodeling and improves the cellular and molecular function leading to a reduced risk of ventricular arrhythmia and SCD. Consequently, some CRT candidates may not need concomitant ICD therapy. This review aimed at focusing on the residual risk of SCD in patients receiving CRT and discussing the requirement of a concomitant ICD therapy in CRT candidates. RECENT
findingsNew imaging diagnostic tools may be helpful to accurately predict patient with a residual risk of SCD and who required a CRT-D implantation. Recent data highlighted that cardiac computed tomography (CT) or myocardial scar tissue analysis using contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) was able to predict the occurrence of VA in patients with bi-ventricular pacing. Cardiac imaging and specifically myocardial scar analysis seem promising to evaluate the risk of SCD following bi-ventricular pacing and will probably be of great help in the future to accurately identify those who needs concomitant defibrillator's protection.
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.