ArticleHeart rhythm O22022
The role of guidance in delivering cardiac resynchronization therapy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical practice guidelines for diagnostic and treatment of the chronic heart failure.Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico · 2024Guideline
- Targeted left ventricular lead positioning to the site of latest activation in cardiac resynchronization therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2023Pooled it
- Redefining response to cardiac resynchronization therapy: a post hoc analysis of the MORE-CRT MPP trial.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026Trial
- 3D computed tomography integration guiding permanent Aveir AR leadless pacemaker implantation: a case report.European heart journal. Case reports · 2025Article
- The role of CT in arrhythmia management-treatment planning and post-procedural imaging surveillance.The British journal of radiology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Positioning the left ventricular lead at the optimal myocardial segment has been proposed to improve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response. Objectives: We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluating echocardiographic and clinical response delivered with different guidance modalities compared to conventional fluoroscopic positioning. Methods: Randomized trials with ≥6 months follow-up comparing any combination of imaging, electrical, hemodynamic, or fluoroscopic guidance were included. Imaging modalities were split whether one modality was used: cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), speckle-tracking echocardiography (STE), single-photon emission computed tomography, cardiac computed tomography (CT), or a combination of these, defined as "multimodality imaging." Results: Twelve studies were included (n = 1864). Pair-wise meta-analysis resulted in significant odds of reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) >15% (odds ratio [OR] 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-2.13, Conclusion: Overall, guidance improves CRT outcomes. STE and multimodality imaging provided the most reliable evidence of efficacy. Wide CIs observed for results of CMR guidance suggest more powered studies are required before a clear ranking is possible.
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.