ArticleJACC. Advances2025
Propensity Score Analysis of Possible Medication Effects on Outcomes in Patients With Systemic Right Ventricles.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intermittent Levosimendan Administration for Advanced Heart Failure Treatment in Adults with Congenital Heart Disease (Levo-ACHD Study).Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Recent advances in congenital heart disease with a systemic right ventricle: new insights for heart failure treatment from last EURO-ACHD Congress 2025.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026Article
- Evidence-based Management of Heart Failure in the Systemic Right Ventricle.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- Critical Care of the Adult With Congenital Heart Disease.JACC. Advances · 2025Review
- Sacubitril/Valsartan and Dapagliflozin in Patients with a Failing Systemic Right Ventricle: Effects on the Arrhythmic Burden.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
46 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with systemic right ventricle (SRV), either d-transposition of the great arteries following an atrial switch procedure or congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries, develop severe right ventricular dysfunction, prompting appropriate medical therapy. However, the efficacy of beta-blockers and angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) in SRV patients is unproven. Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine the effects of ACEI/ARB and beta-blockers on outcomes in SRV patients after accounting for likely cofounders affecting their use. Methods: From a retrospective, multicenter study on heart failure-related outcome in individuals with SRV, those who were taking an ACEI/ARB, beta-blocker, or both of these medication were identified. We performed a propensity analysis to match them to those not using these medications at their initial visit. Matching was based on a propensity score, which captured co-morbidities, demographics, and baseline echocardiographic parameters. Primary outcome of death, transplant, or mechanical circulatory support, and secondary outcomes of heart failure hospitalizations/atrial arrhythmias were analyzed respectively. Results: We identified 393 patients taking ACEI/ARB or beta-blocker, or taking both a beta-blocker and ACEI/ARB (62.1% male, median age 31.3 years) and 484 patients (56.4% male, median age of 26.0 years) who were neither on a beta-blocker nor on ACEI/ARB at the time of initial clinic visit. Median follow-up was ∼8 years. After propensity matching, medication use was not associated with decreased mortality, heart failure hospitalizations, or arrhythmias. Hazard ratios remained positive for beta blockers, implying potential harm rather than benefit. Conclusions: In this large multicenter propensity-matched observational study, patients with SRV taking beta-blockers or ACEI/ARB did not have a benefit in survival or reduced hospitalization. The likelihood of demonstrating favorable effects in larger studies appears remote.
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.