ReviewHeart rhythm O22023
Analysis of risk stratification and prevention of sudden death in pediatric patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: Dilemmas and clarity.
Review in Heart rhythm O2, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electrical device therapy in the paediatric population-age, indications, strategies and limitations.Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2025Review
- New Guidelines of Pediatric Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: What Is Changing in Clinical Practice?Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Review
- Mexican guidelines 2024 for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) has been considered the most common cause of sudden death (SD) in the young. However, introduction of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in HCM has proved highly effective and the mainstay of preventing SD in children, adolescents, and adults by terminating malignant ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Nevertheless, ICD decision making is generally regarded as more difficult in pediatrics, and the strategy for selecting ICD patients from this population remains without consensus. Prospective studies in HCM children and adolescents have shown the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology traditional major risk marker strategy to be reliable with >90% sensitivity in selecting patients for SD prevention. International data in >2000 young HCM patients assembled over 20 years who were stratified by major risk markers showed ICDs effectively prevented SD in 20%. Alternatively, novel quantitative risk scoring initiatives provide 5-year risk estimates that are potentially useful as adjunctive tools to facilitate discussion of prophylactic ICD risks vs benefit but are as yet unsupported by prospective outcome studies. Risk scoring strategies are characterized by reasonable discriminatory statistical power (C-statistic 0.69-0.76) for identifying patients with SD events but with relatively low sensitivity, albeit with specificity comparable with the risk marker strategy. While some reticence for obligating healthy-appearing young patients to lifelong device implants is understandable, underutilization of the ICD in high-risk children and adolescents can represent a lost opportunity for fulfilling the long-standing aspiration of SD prevention. This review provides a critical assessment of the current strengths and weaknesses of SD risk stratification strategies in young HCM patients in an effort to clarify clinical decision making in this challenging subpopulation.
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.