ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2026
Cardio-oncology care in German hospitals: a multicentre inpatient survey of practices, perceptions and guideline gaps.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity (CTR-CVT) is a leading non-cancer cause of morbidity and mortality in oncology patients. Implementation of the 2022 ESC Guidelines on cardio-oncology in German inpatient care remains poorly characterised.
methodsCross-sectional online survey of 1,435 German hospital departments (February-October 2025). Cardiologists, internists, gynaecologists and oncologists answered items on risk stratification, diagnostics, biomarkers, communication and care quality.
results120 physicians responded (cardiologists 36.7%, oncologists 23.3%, gynaecologists 22.5%, internists 17.5%; 73.3% academic/university hospitals). Pre-chemotherapy risk stratification was reported by 85.4% of oncologists and gynaecologists, yet cardiologists were involved in only 28-35%, with heterogeneous risk parameters across specialties. Pre-chemotherapy N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) use ranged from 85.3% (cardiology) to 15.8% (gynaecology; p < 0.001); 52.6% of gynaecologists used no biomarker. In high-risk patients (anthracyclines plus pre-existing heart failure), gynaecologists monitored significantly less than oncologists at every time point, with 12-month surveillance at 5.3% versus 54.2% (p = 0.001); acute cardiac events were the predominant trigger (36.8%), reflecting reactive rather than proactive practice. Cardiological co-management was median 100% (IQR 50-100) in gynaecology versus 70% (IQR 30-100) in oncology. Dedicated cardio-oncology boards existed in only 1.3% of institutions despite > 70% endorsement; median perceived deficit to optimal care was 50-63%. Top-requested interventions were digital risk-stratification tools (up to 81.8%) and interdisciplinary continuing education (up to 72.7%).
conclusionThis survey shows that, among participating hospitals, inpatient cardio-oncology care had substantial guideline-practice gaps. Structured solutions were broadly endorsed: digital risk-stratification tools, post-treatment surveillance and cardio-oncology boards are concrete implementation targets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42507158What 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.