Trial reportEuropean journal of heart failure2025
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in ischaemic versus non-ischaemic heart failure: Insights from the VICTORIA trial.
Trial report in European journal of heart failure, 2025. 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.
- Electro-Mechanical Dissociation in Chagas Cardiomyopathy: Comparative Analysis of Arrhythmic Burden Beyond LVEF.Journal of arrhythmia · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsGuidelines recommend the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) to reduce the risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) among individuals with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, the magnitude of benefit from ICD therapy remains unclear in those with a non-ischaemic aetiology of HF. METHODS AND
resultsParticipants with HFrEF and recent HF decompensation in the VICTORIA trial were categorized based on the utilization of a baseline ICD and HF aetiology. A propensity-score adjusted model was used to assess the effect of the presence of an ICD on SCD, cardiovascular death (including SCD) and all-cause death. Of 5040 participants with HFrEF (53.6% ischaemic; 46.4% non-ischaemic), 1399 (27.8%) had an ICD. Over a median of 10.8 months, pre-existing ICD was associated with an overall reduction in SCD (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43-0.96), but no difference in cardiovascular death (aHR 0.99, 95% CI 0.83-1.18) or all-cause death (aHR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87-1.19). HF aetiology did not modify the effects of ICD on SCD (ischaemic HF: aHR 0.61, 95% CI 0.38-0.98; non-ischaemic HF: aHR 0.72, 95% CI 0.36-1.43; p
conclusionsAmong patients with HFrEF with recent decompensation, presence of an ICD was associated with a reduction in SCD, but did not translate to a reduction in the risk of cardiovascular or all-cause death. Future research is required to evaluate which patients with HFrEF benefit from ICD implantation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.