Observational studyClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2024
Modern heart failure treatment is superior to conventional treatment across the left ventricular ejection spectrum: real-life data from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry 2013-2020.
Observational study in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk prediction in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the LIFE-Preserved model.European heart journal · 2026Article
- Clinical Relevance of Atrial Fibrillation in End-Stage Heart Failure Patients Actively Waiting on Heart Transplant.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Article
- Long-term prognosis in Takotsubo syndrome compared to heart failure: observations from a global federated research network.ESC heart failure · 2026Observational
- Optimizing Heart Failure-Specific Disease Management Programs and Patient Care in Saudi Arabia: A Saudi Heart Association Position Statement.Journal of the Saudi Heart Association · 2026Article
- Guideline-directed medical therapy after revascularization and outcomes in ischaemic cardiomyopathy.ESC heart failure · 2025Article
- Impact of the Swedish Care Coordination Act on Heart Failure Readmissions and Length of Stay.Circulation. Heart failure · 2025Article
- Integrated Care in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Optimal Medical Treatment for Heart Failure: Results from the Heart failuRe ObsErvational Study (HEROES).Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Burden of heart failure attributable to chronic kidney disease in older adults (1990-2021): an analysis from the global burden of disease study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study is aimed to compare the effectiveness of modern therapy including angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) with conventional heart failure treatment in the real world.
backgroundSince ARNI and SGLT2i were introduced to treat heart failure (HF), its therapeutic regimen has modernized from previous treatment with beta-blocker (BB) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) with mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) as added-on in HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, a comparison between conventional and modern treatment strategies with drugs in combination has not been performed.
methodsThis observational study (2013-2020), using the Swedish HF Registry, involved 20,849 HF patients. Patients received either conventional (BB, ACEi/ARB, with/without MRA, n = 20,140) or modern (BB, ACEi/ARB, MRA, SGLT2i or BB, ARNI, MRA with/without SGLT2i, n = 709) treatment at the index visit. The endpoints were all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality.
resultsModern HF therapy was associated with a significant 28% reduction in all-cause mortality (adjusted HR [aHR], 0.72 (0.54-0.96); p = 0.024) and a significant 62% reduction in CV mortality (aHR, 0.38 (0.21-0.68); p = 0.0013) compared to conventional HF treatment. Similar results emerged in a sensitivity analysis using propensity score matching. The interaction analyses did not reveal any trends for EF (< 40% and ≥ 40%), sex, age (< 70 and ≥ 70 years), eGFR (< 60 and ≥ 60 ml/min/1.73 m
conclusionIn this nationwide study, modern HF therapy was associated with significantly reduced all-cause and CV mortality, regardless of EF, sex, age, eGFR, and etiology of HF.
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.