ArticleHeart and vessels2022
Prognostic predictors and echocardiographic time course after device replacement in patients treated chronically with cardiac resynchronization therapy devices.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2022. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Heart Failure with Improved Ejection Fraction: Insight into the Variable Nature of Left Ventricular Systolic Function.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prognostic predictors of death or heart failure hospitalization and the echocardiographic response after initial cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device replacement (CRT-r) remain unclear. We evaluated the predictors and the echocardiographic time course in patients after CRT-r. Consecutive 60 patients underwent CRT-r because of battery depletion. Patients were divided into two groups depending on the chronic echocardiographic response to CRT (left ventricular end-systolic volume [LVESV] reduction of ≥ 15%) at the time of CRT-r: CRT responders (group A; 35 patients) and CRT nonresponders (group B; 25 patients). The primary endpoint was a composite of death from any cause or heart failure hospitalization. Changes in LVESV and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) after CRT-r were also analyzed. During the mean follow-up of 46 ± 33 months after CRT-r, the primary endpoint occurred more frequently in group B (group A versus group B; 8/35 [23%] patients versus 19/25 [76%] patients, p < 0.001). No significant changes in LVESV and LVEF were observed at the mean of 46 ± 29 months after CRT-r in both groups. A multivariate analysis identified echocardiographic nonresponse to CRT, chronic kidney disease, atrial fibrillation, and New York Heart Association functional class III or IV at the time of CRT-r as independent predictors of the primary endpoint in all patients. Residual echocardiographic nonresponse, comorbidities, and heart failure symptoms at the time of CRT-r predict the subsequent very long-term prognosis after CRT-r. No further echocardiographic response to CRT was found after CRT-r.
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.