ArticleClinical cardiology2024
Interaction of left ventricular size with the outcome of cardiac resynchronization therapy in Japanese patients.
Article in Clinical cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Interaction of left ventricular size with the outcome of cardiac resynchronization therapy in Japanese patients.Clinical cardiology · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe analyzed the influence of the QRS duration (QRSd) to LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) ratio on cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) outcomes in heart failure patients classified as III/IV per the New York Heart Association (NYHA) and with small body size. HYPOTHESIS: We proposed the hypothesis that the QRSd/LV size ratio is a better index of the CRT substrate.
methodsWe enrolled 114 patients with advanced heart failure (NYHA class III/IV, and LV ejection fraction >35%) who received a CRT device, including those with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and QRSd ≥120 milliseconds (n = 60), non-LBBB and QRSd ≥150 milliseconds (n = 30) and non-LBBB and QRSd of 120-149 milliseconds (n = 24).
resultsOver a mean follow-up period of 65 ± 58 months, the incidence of the primary endpoint, a composite of all-cause death and hospitalization for heart failure, showed no significant intergroup difference (43.3% vs. 50.0% vs. 37.5%, respectively, p = .72). Similarly, among 104 patients with QRSd/LVEDV ≥ 0.67 (n = 54) and QRSd/LVEDV < 0.67 (n = 52), no significant differences were observed in the incidence of the primary endpoint (35.1% vs. 51.9%, p = .49). Nevertheless, patients with QRSd/LVEDV ≥ 0.67 showed better survival than those with QRSd/LVEDV < 0.67 (14.8% vs. 34.6%, p = .0024).
conclusionAdvanced HF patients with a higher QRSd/LVEDV ratio showed better survival in this small-body-size population. Thus, the risk is concentrated among those with a larger QRSd, and patients with a relatively smaller left ventricular size appeared to benefit from CRT.
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.