ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Cardiac glycosides in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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.
- A highly penetrantbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The prognostic benefits of cardiac glycosides in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remain controversial. Although digitoxin exhibits more favorable pharmacokinetic characteristics than digoxin, its potential to provide superior clinical efficacy has not yet been established. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched for relevant studies published up to September 12, 2025. The study population was limited to patients with HFrEF. Randomized controlled trails that compare clinical outcomes between cardiac glycosides and placebo were included. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcome was hospitalization due to heart failure. Additionally, an indirect comparison was performed to compare the efficacy of digitoxin vs. digoxin. This study was registered with PROSPERO (No. CRD420251142262). Results: A total of 6 RCTs encompassing 8,488 patients were included. Compared with placebo, cardiac glycoside therapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of hospitalization for heart failure [HR = 0.79, 95% CI (0.67-0.94)]. However, there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality [HR = 0.98, 95% CI (0.92-1.04)]. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed between digitoxin and digoxin in terms of mortality reduction [HR = 0.93, 95% CI (0.77-1.13)] or hospitalization risk for heart failure [HR = 1.35, 95% CI (0.70-2.60)]. Conclusion: In patients with HFrEF, cardiac glycoside therapy may reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure. Compared with digoxin, digitoxin has not demonstrated any significant advantage with respect to all-cause mortality or hospitalization for heart failure. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251142262, PROSPERO CRD420251142262.
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.