Searching across hundreds of databases

Our searching services are busy right now. Your search will reload in five seconds.

X
Forgot Password

If you have forgotten your password you can enter your email here and get a temporary password sent to your email.

X
Forgot Password

If you have forgotten your password you can enter your email here and get a temporary password sent to your email.

Efficacy of implantable cardioconverter defibrillator or cardiac resynchronization therapy compared with combined therapy in survival of patients with heart failure: a meta-analysis.

Medicine | 2015

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) monotherapies with CRT-ICD combined therapy. Databases were searched to identify studies that compared CRT or ICD alone with CRT-ICD combined therapy in patients with heart failure. The primary outcome was rate of death for any cause, and secondary outcomes included rate of death or hospitalization due to heart failure or any cause. Nine studies with 7679 patients were included. Combined data of ICD and CRT monotherapies found that there was a higher risk of all-cause death (odds ratio [OR] 1.348, P < 0.001) and death or hospitalization from heart failure (OR 1.368, P < 0.001) with monotherapy compared with CRT-ICD combined therapy. No significant difference was observed between mono and combined therapy groups for risk of death or hospitalization from any cause (OR 1.292, P = 0.083). Compared with ICD or CRT monotherapy, CRT-ICD therapy had favorable outcomes regarding all-cause death and the risk of hospitalization or death due to heart failure.

Pubmed ID: 25654375 RIS Download

Research resources used in this publication

None found

Additional research tools detected in this publication

Antibodies used in this publication

None found

Associated grants

None

Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.

This is a list of tools and resources that we have found mentioned in this publication.


RevMan (tool)

RRID:SCR_003581

THIS RESOURCE IS NO LONGER IN SERVICE. Documented on January 5, 2023.A software package that does meta-analysis and provides results in tabular format and graphically.

View all literature mentions

Google Scholar (tool)

RRID:SCR_008878

Google Scholar provides a simple way to broadly search for scholarly literature. From one place, you can search across many disciplines and sources: articles, theses, books, abstracts and court opinions, from academic publishers, professional societies, online repositories, universities and other web sites. Google Scholar helps you find relevant work across the world of scholarly research. Features of Google Scholar * Search diverse sources from one convenient place * Find articles, theses, books, abstracts or court opinions * Locate the complete document through your library or on the web * Learn about key scholarly literature in any area of research How are documents ranked? Google Scholar aims to rank documents the way researchers do, weighing the full text of each document, where it was published, who it was written by, as well as how often and how recently it has been cited in other scholarly literature. * Publishers - Include your publications in Google Scholar * Librarians - Help patrons discover your library''s resources

View all literature mentions