ReviewCardiac failure review2025
The Timing for Primary Prevention for ICD in the Current Era of Pharmacotherapy.
Review in Cardiac failure review, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent advances in the pharmacological therapy of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) have significantly impacted the overall survival, heart failure hospitalisations and rates of sudden cardiac death (SCD). In this context, the relevant timing of placing ICDs as primary prevention is a matter of on-going debate. This manuscript provides evidence for an updated view regarding the timing of implanting ICD in eligible patients with HFrEF receiving optimal guideline-directed medical therapy, accounting for the timing to reverse cardiac remodelling (RCR) occurrence and residual SCD risks over time. Clinically significant RCR occurs beyond 3 months of optimal guideline-directed medical therapy, while the residual risks of SCDs remain low for certain HFrEF populations. However, when deciding on ICD implantation, one should always consider individual modulators of RCR and SCD risks, as well as the non-competing risks of death that can affect patients' overall outcomes. Risk stratification algorithms need to be developed and validated in future pragmatic clinical trials to further define better timing for the use of ICDs in primary prevention.
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.