ArticleJHLT open2026
Impact of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with left ventricular assist devices: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in JHLT open, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Many patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, the impact of CRT on their clinical and hemodynamic outcomes remains unclear. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate CRT's impact on survival in LVAD patients. We searched PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from inception through April 30, 2025, for studies reporting outcomes in LVAD patients with CRT. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality in patients with versus without CRT. Secondary clinical outcomes included ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) and shocks delivered. Hemodynamic outcomes included heart rate, right atrial pressure, mean pulmonary artery pressure, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, thermodilution cardiac output, pulmonary artery saturation, right ventricular stroke work index, and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter. Results: Thirteen studies, including 3,665 patients, were analyzed. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) did not demonstrate any significant survival benefit, whether comparing CRT-D versus ICD (OR 1.12 [0.85-1.48]), CRT on versus CRT off (OR 1.48 [0.87-2.53]), CRT versus no device (OR 0.99 [0.61-1.59]), or CRT versus no device or ICD (OR 1.00 [0.16-6.31]). Similarly, none of the tested comparisons showed significant differences in VAs incidence or shock rates. Biventricular pacing demonstrated no advantage for any hemodynamic outcomes, whether compared to right ventricular pacing or intrinsic rhythm. Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, CRT was not associated with overall survival benefit in LVAD recipients, nor with hemodynamic improvement. Future randomized trials may be warranted to definitively establish CRT's value in this population and refine patient selection criteria for optimal outcomes.
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.