SynthesisOpen heart2025
Wearable cardioverter defibrillator for transient arrhythmic risk and sudden cardiac death prevention: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Open heart, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator in Patients at Transient Risk of Sudden Cardiac Death: State of the Art and Contemporary Clinical Evidence.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Magnetocardiographic Rotation Score and Arrhythmic Endpoints in Primary-Prevention ICD Recipients: An Exploratory Substudy of the Magneto-SCD Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- A Cumulative Electrical Risk Score Is Associated with Appropriate ICD Therapy in Primary-Prevention Patients with Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Acute Coronary Syndrome and Recreational Drug Use: A Comprehensive Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Clinical, Laboratory, Infectious, and Intervention Factors Associated with ICU Mortality: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparative Effectiveness of Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Reducing Heart Failure-Related Unplanned Readmissions: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Prophylactic Versus Reactive Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation in Repaired Tetralogy of Fallot: A Narrative Review.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Line-of-Duty Deaths Among Firefighters in Poland: A Retrospective Observational Study of Mortality Differences Between Career and Volunteer Firefighters.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator in Adult Congenital Heart Disease: A Bridge to Decision, Recovery, and Advanced Therapies.Heart failure reviews · 2026Review
- Beyond Breathlessness Intensity: A Prospective Psychometric Validation of the Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile in Heart Failure with Reduced and Mildly Reduced Ejection Fraction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Cost-utility analysis of the wearable cardioverter defibrillator in high-risk post-myocardial infarction patients in the Spanish healthcare system.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSudden cardiac death (SCD) is a common cause of cardiovascular mortality, often triggered by ventricular arrhythmias in the setting of myocardial vulnerability. The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) offers temporary protection against SCD, particularly when an implantable device is contraindicated or premature.
objectivesWe conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of the WCD in appropriately terminating life-threatening arrhythmias such as sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF), preventing sudden cardiac death.
methodsFollowing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we systematically reviewed 40 studies comprising 59 647 adults fitted with a WCD for primary or secondary SCD prevention. Random-effects meta-analysis, subgroup analysis, meta-regression and sensitivity analyses were performed.
resultsThe pooled incidence of appropriate WCD intervention was 3% (95% CI 2% to 3%), with substantial heterogeneity (I²=88.9%). The prediction interval ranged from 1% to 8%, indicating that future studies conducted in selected high-risk populations may observe significantly higher WCD intervention. Life-threatening arrhythmias were higher during early follow-up (≤60 days). An appropriate daily WCD wearing time significantly influenced the results. Gender, age, ejection fraction and study design were not significant modifiers. No publication bias was detected.
conclusionsThe WCD represents an effective strategy for preventing SCD in early high-risk settings, with its benefit closely linked to adherence and appropriate patient selection.
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.