ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Aetiology of Heart Failure, Rather than Sex, Determines Reverse LV Remodelling Response to CRT.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex Specific Outcomes With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients With Symptomatic Heart Failure Having Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.American journal of medicine open · 2025Review
- Impact of Combined Treatment with ARNi and SGLT2i on Clinical and Echocardiographic Outcomes in Patients with CRT During Mid-term Period.Current cardiology reviews · 2025Article
- Special Issue: Latest Advances in Delivery and Outcomes of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy and Conduction System Pacing.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- The Value of Left Ventricular Mechanical Dyssynchrony and Scar Burden in the Combined Assessment of Factors Associated with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Response in Patients with CRT-D.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
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 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established therapy for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Women appear to respond differently to CRT, yet it remains unclear whether this is inherent to the female sex itself, or due to other patient characteristics. In this study, we aimed to investigate sex differences in response to CRT.
methodsThis is a post-hoc analysis of a prospective, multicenter study (MARC) in the Netherlands, studying HFrEF patients with an indication for CRT according to the guidelines (
resultsIn the MARC cohort 39% were women, and in the Belgian cohort 32% were women. In the MARC cohort, 70% of the women were responders (defined as >15% decrease in LVESV) at 6 months, compared to 55% of men (
conclusionsWomen showed a greater echocardiographic response to CRT at 6 months follow-up. However, after adjustment for BSA and ischemic etiology, no differences were found in LV-function measures or survival, suggesting that non-ischemic etiology is responsible for greater response rates in women treated with CRT.
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.