ArticleThe British journal of cardiology2024
Evaluating real-world mortality risk after defibrillator implantation.
Article in The British journal of cardiology, 2024. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Protection against the increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) due to ventricular arrhythmias is offered by the implantation of cardiac defibrillators. A life-expectancy of less than one year is usually a contraindication to the implantation of these devices. We evaluated the outcomes of all those who received defibrillator implantation for any clinical indication at our centre in the same year that early (<12 months) death notifications occurred. This is a single-centre retrospective study on the outcomes of all patients who had a transvenous defibrillator implant in 2015. All transvenous defibrillator devices implanted for both primary and secondary prevention of SCD were included. Patient demographic data and device data were studied. Data from 235 patients were analysed. In a follow-up period of 66.2 ± 3.8 months, 77 (32.8%) of the study cohort died; 20 (8.5%) of these patients died less than 12 months post-implant. None of the deaths were directly arrhythmia related. Factors that were significant in predicting mortality included age and ejection fraction <35% (p<0.01). From a preprocedure biomarker perspective, an increased red cell distribution width (RDW) was strongly associated with early mortality risk on univariate and multi-variate analysis (p<0.001). Receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curve analysis found that the optimal cut-off for RDW was 14.75% (area under curve 0.75; sensitivity 0.69; specificity 0.77; p<0.001). In conclusion, there are limitations in fully assessing patient prognosis despite current guidance. Universal clinical frailty scores that incorporate biomarkers may be helpful in enhancing this pre-assessment process to improve the evaluation of the risk of early non-arrhythmic-related death for implantable cardioverter defibrillator candidates.
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.