ArticleHeart rhythm O22025
Cardiac resynchronization therapy in chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy: A systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a well-established therapy for patients with heart failure. However, patients with chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy (CCC) were underrepresented in pivotal CRT trials. Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to quantitatively describe the outcomes of CRT in patients with CCC. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and LILACS registries for studies evaluating the response to CRT in patients with CCC. We applied no language or date restrictions. We applied an inverse-variance random-effects model for a meta-analysis of proportions. Results: We included 4 observational cohort studies comprising 250 patients with CCC undergoing CRT. At CRT implantation, the mean age was 59 ± 12 years, 87% of patients (217) were New York Heart Association class III/IV, and the average left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 27% ± 7%. During a mean follow-up of 30 ± 25 months, the all-cause death rate was 38% (95% confidence interval [CI], 21-56), cardiac death rate was 29% (95% CI, 13-47), and the noncardiac death rate was 4% (95% CI, 1-9). After CRT, the proportion of patients rated New York Heart Association class III/IV was improved to 21% (95% CI, 5-44), with a pooled post-CRT LVEF of 36.3% (95% CI, 27.0-48.0). Conclusion: In patients with CCC, CRT was associated with improvements in LVEF and symptomatic and functional burden (class III/IV), but overall mortality remained high. Although CRT seems to be beneficial in this population, further research is warranted to better characterize its impact on long-term clinical 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.