ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Different beta-blockers for preventing arrhythmic events in patients with long QT syndrome: a network meta-analysis.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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.
- Structural and Echocardiographic Abnormalities in Congenital Long QT Syndrome: A Review of the Literature.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
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
Objective: This study aims to compare the efficacy of different types of beta-blockers in preventing arrhythmias in patients with long QT syndrome (LQTS), and simultaneously analyze the relationship between dose and effect within each drug by incorporating dose as a continuous covariate. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in the electronic database, with the cutoff date set at July 20, 2025. The search scope was limited to observational studies that compared at least two drug strategies. A Bayesian arm random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed, in which the daily equivalent dose (mg/day) was included as a continuous covariate to explore the dose-response relationship. Results: This analysis included 5,692 patients with LQTS from 10 cohort studies. In LQT1, nadolol was superior to propranolol (RR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.39-0.90) and had the highest probability of being the optimal treatment (SUCRA = 0.92). Dose-response trends for all drugs were non-significant (all Conclusion: Nadolol demonstrates significant and consistent clinical advantages in LQT1 patients and should be considered as first-line therapy for this subtype. In LQT2 patients, nadolol not only shows a superiority trend but also has a significant dose-effect relationship, supporting its clinical priority; in LQT3 patients, nadolol exhibits a significant dose-dependent risk reduction trend, though no statistically significant differences in efficacy were observed among all beta-blockers. Additionally, LQT3 patients should be cautious of the potential risks associated with atenolol.
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.