ReviewThe Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management2024
The Role of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance to Predict Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Review in The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management, 2024. 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.
- Absence of Fibrosis Influences Prognosis of Cardiac Resynchronization in Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Calculation of Ejection Fraction Using Cardiac Computed Tomography: Clinical Evolution, Reliability, and Technological Challenges-A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Review.JAMA · 2026Review
- Tissue characterization using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and response to cardiac resynchronization therapy.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 · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has revolutionized heart failure (HF) management, offering benefits in morbidity, mortality, and symptom alleviation. However, optimal response rates are not universally achieved, necessitating enhanced patient-selection strategies. Myocardial scar patterns, quantified by delayed-enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance (DE-CMR), have been implicated in CRT outcomes. We conducted a meta-analysis of observational studies assessing CRT responses by performing a systematic literature search using PubMed, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, and the Web of Science. Scar burden, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV), and left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) were evaluated. CRT response rates among ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy patients were also explored. This meta-analysis incorporated eight studies meeting the eligibility criteria. CRT responders exhibited a significantly lower scar burden (-11.7%; 95% confidence interval, 6.6%-16.8%) compared to non-responders, supporting the predictive value of scar quantification (
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.