ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2022
ICD indication in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: which algorithm to use?
Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Global and Temporal Trends in Utilization and Outcomes of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology · 2025Pooled it
- Age and Sex Differences in the Risk of Sudden Cardiac Death in Patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Multi-Centre Cohort Study.Vascular health and risk management · 2025Observational
- Apical Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Fatal yet Underappreciated Variant of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.Cureus · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the agreement in the indication of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in patients with Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, as per the 2014 European Society of Cardiology and 2020 American Heart Association recommendations, and evaluate fragmented QRS as a predictor of cardiovascular outcome.
methodsRetrospective cohort with 81 patients was evaluated between 2019 and 2021. Patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy ≥16 years old were included. Exclusion criteria include secondary myocardiopathy and follow-up <1 year. Kappa coefficient was used to determine the agreement. Survival and incidence curves were determined by Kaplan-Meier method. A p<0.05 was considered significant.
resultsThe fragmented QRS was identified in 44.4% of patients. There were no differences between patients with and without fragmented QRS regarding clinical parameters, echocardiography, fibrosis, and sudden cardiac death risk. During follow-up of 4.8±3.4 years, there was no sudden cardiac death, but 20.6% patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator had at least one appropriate shock. Three of the seven appropriate shocks occurred in European Society of Cardiology low- to moderate-risk patients. Three shocks occurred in moderate-risk patients and four in American Heart Association high-risk patients. Overall recommendations agreement was 64% with a kappa of 0.270 (p=0.007). C-statistic showed no differences regarding the incidence of appropriate shock (p=0.644).
conclusionsudden cardiac death risk stratification algorithms present discrepancies in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator indication, both with low accuracy.
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.