ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2021
Evaluation of potential underuse of cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2021. 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.
- Evaluation of potential underuse of cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.Journal of arrhythmia · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe number of patients with chronic heart failure is increasing in Japan. However, the annual number of patients with heart failure who receive cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been constant in the last few years. In this study, we evaluated patients who did not receive CRT despite being eligible for this treatment to elucidate the clinical impact of CRT administration.
methodsWe assessed 214 patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 50% (excluding patients treated with CRT) who underwent transthoracic echocardiography between January and May 2020 at our institution. The patients were stratified into two groups: Group A (n = 26; patients eligible for CRT) and Group B (n = 188; patients ineligible for CRT); however, all patients only received pharmacological therapy. We retrospectively analyzed the prognosis of these patients with respect to the cumulative number of hospitalizations for heart failure and cardiogenic deaths.
resultsWe observed no significant between-group differences in age, sex, and severity/diagnosis of organic heart disease. Group A had a significantly higher number of hospitalizations for heart failure and cardiogenic deaths than Group B (log-rank test,
conclusionsThis study shows that 12% of patients were eligible for CRT. However, the implantation rate was low and no one was implanted. CRT is underutilized in patients who have heart failure with reduced LVEF. Therefore, we strongly recommend CRT for patients with indications for 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.