SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2025
The impact of new tetralogy drugs on ventricular remodeling in heart failure patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2025. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHeart failure, particularly heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), represents a major global health challenge due to its high prevalence, rapid progression, and substantial mortality rates. While the “New Tetralogy” drugs (angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists) have significantly advanced HFrEF management, their comparative effects on ventricular remodeling remain unclear. This network meta-analysis systematically evaluates these therapeutic agents to inform optimal clinical decision-making.
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating ventricular remodeling parameters in HFrEF patients. Twenty-two RCTs involving 16,425 participants were included. Data were analyzed using Stata 14.2 and RevMan 5.3, with outcomes expressed as mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
resultsOur study showed markedly different therapeutic characteristics: sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors significantly reduced left ventricular mass index (MD = -6.57, 95% CI: -11.98 to -1.16), while beta-blockers demonstrated superior improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction compared to mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MD = 3.54, 95% CI: 0.60 to 6.48) through indirect comparison. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists showed greater efficacy in reducing left ventricular end-systolic volume (MD = -22.10, 95% CI: -31.42 to -12.78). Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors outperformed renin-angiotensin system inhibitors across multiple parameters, including left ventricular end-systolic volume (MD = -7.00, 95% CI: -13.91 to -0.09), end-systolic volume index (MD = -13.78, 95% CI: -25.98 to -1.58), and end-diastolic volume index (MD = -5.80, 95% CI: -9.76 to -1.84).
conclusionsThis network meta-analysis demonstrates that each component of the “New Tetralogy” applies unique beneficial effects on ventricular remodeling. Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists predominantly improve ventricular volumes, while beta-blockers significantly enhance systolic function. These findings provide evidence-based guidance for personalized therapeutic strategies in HFrEF management, particularly for patients with persistent left ventricular systolic dysfunction. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023454737.
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.