ReviewArchives of medical sciences. Atherosclerotic diseases2025
Clinical outcomes of isolated versus systemic cardiac sarcoidosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Archives of medical sciences. Atherosclerotic diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Isolated cardiac sarcoidosis (ICS) is characterized by a lack of the apparent extra-cardiac involvement seen in systemic cardiac sarcoidosis (SCS) and is being increasingly recognized as a distinct clinical phenotype of cardiac sarcoidosis. This systematic review and meta-analysis pooled data from published literature to assess any differences in outcomes of ICS vs. SCS patients. Methods: Studies were identified from PubMed/Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Risk ratios were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method in a random effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Higgins Results: The analysis included 7 studies and 918 CS patients (28.9% ICS and 71.1% SCS). Increased risk for arrhythmias (RR = 3.06, 95% CI: 0.98 to 9.55, Conclusions: Although ICS patients were more likely to experience arrhythmias, no significant difference was observed between ICS and SCS patients for composite outcome, cardiac death, or hospitalizations due to heart failure.
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.