ReviewHerz2026
[ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular diseases and pregnancy-most important facts of the 2025 update].
Review in Herz, 2026. 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.
- Takotsubo Syndrome After Emergency Cesarean Delivery in Twin Pregnancy: A Rare Cause of Acute Postpartum Heart Failure.Case reports in obstetrics and gynecology · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The 2025 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines on cardiovascular disease in pregnancy represents the second revision of the guideline versions published in 2011 and 2018. The new version aims to incorporate the most up-to-date evidence and update the resulting recommendations for clinical practice. The experts appointed by the ESC constitute a new task force compared with the first two versions. However, the thematic focus does not differ fundamentally from the 2018 guidelines. In view of the expanding evidence base, several chapters have become substantially more precise, for example those on risk stratification in women with pre-existing cardiovascular disease; the need for structured, obligatory postpartum follow-up in the event of complications during pregnancy; and the recommended measures for pre-pregnancy screening and counselling. The recommendations continue to be based predominantly on level C evidence, i.e., on expert opinion and consensus. Since the thalidomide scandal in 1962, there have been very few prospective randomized trials including pregnant women. Explicit presentation of level C evidence is therefore particularly important, as individual physicians are only rarely involved in the care of pregnant women. This task is demanding, because both the pregnant woman and the fetus require individual consideration. This should, however, not be discouraging but rather viewed as a positive challenge. This work is substantially supported by the establishment of the institution of a "Pregnancy Heart Team." These teams, usually available 24/7 in larger centers, ensure interdisciplinary collaboration among multiple specialties and professions in order to arrive at the best possible decisions for both mother and child. The 2025 guidelines devote an expanded chapter to this topic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41410700What 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.