Observational studyAmerican journal of therapeutics
Predictors for Super-Responders in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.
Observational study in American journal of therapeutics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Added Value of MAPSE to Assess LV Systolic Function in Conventional Cardiac Pacing.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Refining Patient Selection Criteria for LV-Only Fusion Pacing in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Analyzing Insights of Super-Response in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy with Fusion Pacing.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A Comparative Analysis of Apical Rocking and Septal Flash: Two Views of the Same Systole?Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrediction of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response, particularly a super-response, is of great importance. STUDY QUESTION: The aim of our study was to assess the predictors for super-responders in CRT. STUDY
designWe conducted a retrospective, observational study, which finally included 622 patients with heart failure treated with CRT between January 2008 and May 2020 who had a minimal follow-up of 6 months after CRT. MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: A total of 192 super-responders, defined by a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of at least 45%, and/or minimum 15% increase in LVEF and an improvement of the New York Heart Association functional class by at least 2 degrees at the last follow-up, and the rest of 430 patients who did not fulfill the super-responder criteria.
resultsThe highest rate of super-responders (41.91%, n = 171) was at patients with left ventricle-only pacing with optimal fusion (OPT) compared with patients with biventricular (BiV) pacing (9.81%, n = 21, P < 0.000). In the OPT group, univariable analysis showed that nonischemic cardiomyopathy, a smaller degree of mitral regurgitation, and better left ventricle function at enrollment were predictors for super-response compared with the BiV group where a narrower QRS after implantation, nonischemic cardiomyopathy, and a better baseline LVEF were predictors for super-responders. In the multivariable analysis, both narrower QRS after implantation and nonischemic cardiomyopathy were independent predictors for super-response in the BiV group compared with OPT where nonischemic cardiomyopathy remained the only independent predictor for super-response.
conclusionsIn this retrospective study, OPT CRT programing was an additional predictor of super-response to CRT besides nonischemic cardiomyopathy.
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.