ArticleJHLT open2026
Short- to mid-term outcomes of refractory electrical storm patients listed for urgent heart transplantation.
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
36 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Heart transplantation (HTx) has been suggested for refractory electrical storm (ES). Data regarding the outcomes of these patients are scarce. Objective: To compare the prognosis of refractory ES patients listed for urgent HTx, with and without transplantation. Methods: Patients registered on urgent HTx waiting list for refractory ES were retrospectively included in 13 French centers between 2010-2022. The primary endpoint was in-hospital all-cause mortality. Results: Eighty-five patients were included (85.9% men; 56.0 [48.0-61.0] years old; 55.1% with dilated cardiomyopathy), among whom 45 (52.9%) ultimately underwent HTx during index hospitalization. In the overall cohort, 89.3% of patients received amiodarone, 64.3% beta-blockers, 45.9% required deep sedation, 5.9% underwent stellate ganglion block, and 41.2% received mechanical circulatory support. Catheter ablation was less frequently performed in the transplanted group (20.0% vs 57.5%, p < 0.01). No difference was found for in-hospital mortality between transplanted and non-transplanted patients (28.9% vs 35.0%, HR 0.72 [0.34-1.53], p=0.0.39). After 1-year follow-up, 14 patients (16.5%) of the non-transplanted group eventually underwent HTx, with 4 of them dying subsequently. Five patients (5.9%) were removed from HTx waiting list due to functional improvement. Conversely, 14 transplanted patients (16.5%) died. Conclusion: Refractory ES carries a high in-hospital mortality rate, affecting one-third of patients. Overall, 69.4% of patients listed for urgent HTx underwent transplantation, including 52.9% during index hospitalization and 16.5% within the year post-discharge, highlighting the need to optimize selection criteria and implement a comprehensive treatment that sometimes allows overcoming the acute phase, enabling HTx under more stable conditions.
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.