ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
Predicting Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced/Preserved Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction: A Clinical Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac arrest is a way of demise of patients who are affected by heart failure (HF), being more frequent in those with HF with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF), and is, as such, responsible for 30-50% of cardiac death. Specific data on the risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) related to HF with a preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and HF with a mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) are lacking, as well as data regarding ventricular arrhythmias in this population. Considering the 0.3% person/year incidence rate of investigator-reported ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF), the rate of SCD in the analyzed population seems to be 1.3% per year. Age, gender, history of diabetes and myocardial infarction, left bundle branch block (LBBB) on electrocardiogram (ECG), and a natural logarithm of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), identified a subgroup of HFpEF patients with a higher risk (5-year cumulative incidence of 11%) of sudden death (SD). In HFpEF patients, both glifozins and finerenone did not demonstrate a beneficial effect on SCD incidence in comparison to placebo. A significantly lower rate of SCD emerged in patients who were treated with dapaglifozin (10 vs. 26 pts) among patients with HF with an improved ejection fraction (HFimpEF), who were defined as patients with a previous left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 40%. Promising methods discussed include cardiac magnetic resonance, myocardial scintigraphy, genetic assessment, and electrophysiologic studies for predicting SCD in those patients. In conclusion, arrhythmic SCD in HFpEF patients should not be considered merely as an effect of VT/VF; bradyarrhythmia is probably more frequent and dangerous. The effects of drugs in preventing SCD in HFpEF have not been demonstrated yet.
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.