ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2024
Clinical outcomes during and after wearable cardioverter defibrillator use in Japanese patients with heart failure: A single-center experience.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 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.
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
Background: A wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is indicated for a limited period in patients at high risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Nonischemic heart failure (HF) is common among Japanese patients with HF. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of fatal arrhythmias during WCD use and the clinical outcomes after WCD withdrawal in Japanese patients with HF. Methods: We retrospectively studied 105 hospitalized HF patients who were discharged with a WCD. The main outcome was SCD/ventricular arrhythmias during WCD use and the other outcomes were implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), SCD/ventricular arrhythmias after WCD withdrawal, and changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Results: Eighty-seven (83%) patients received a WCD for primary prevention of SCD, of whom 60 (69%) were new-onset HF patients with an LVEF ≤35%. The median daily wear time was 22.1 h. Two patients experienced sustained ventricular tachycardia and one patient experienced atrioventricular block with asystole while on WCD. After WCD withdrawal, 81 (77%) patients decided not to receive ICD implantation. The percentage of patients with an LVEF ≥35% increased from 20% at baseline to 70% at 1 year after discharge. During the median follow-up of 50 months, 78 (96%) of the 81 patients who did not have an ICD were free of SCD/ventricular arrhythmias. Conclusions: The use of a WCD is useful for determining the appropriate indication for ICD implantation in Japanese patients with new-onset HF, a low LVEF, and a risk of SCD.
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.