ReviewCJC open2021
Sex, Race, and Age Differences of Cardiovascular Outcomes in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy RCTs: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Review in CJC open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Relationship between sex, body size, and cardiac resynchronization therapy benefit: A patient-level meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Heart rhythm · 2024Pooled it
- Sex-Based Differences in Left Bundle Branch Capture During Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing.Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2026Article
- 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
- Optimizing outcomes from cardiac resynchronization therapy: what do recent data and insights say?Expert review of cardiovascular therapy · 2024Review
- Echocardiographic Evaluation in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Single Center Experience.Cureus · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is beneficial in patients who have heart failure with reduced ejection fraction or arrhythmic events. However, most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showing survival benefits primarily enrolled older white men. This study aims to evaluate CRT efficacy by sex, race, and age in RCTs.
methodsFive electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, Emcare, Medline, and PubMed) were searched from inception to July 12, 2021 for RCTs with CRT in adult patients. Data were analyzed for clinical outcomes including all-cause or cardiovascular (CV) death, worsening heart failure (HF), and HF hospitalization (HFH) according to sex, race, and age.
resultsAmong six RCTs with up to moderate risk of bias, 54% (n = 3,630 of 6,682; mean age 64 years, 22% female, 8% black patients) had CRT device implantation. All-cause death (odds ratio [OR], 0.51;
conclusionsWhereas all-cause death was lower in female CRT patients, other reported outcomes did not significantly differ by sex, race, or age. Only 6 studies partially reported outcomes. Thus, enhanced reporting and analyses are required to overcome such paucity of data to evaluate the impact of these factors on clinical outcomes in distinct patient cohorts with CRT indication.
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.