↓ Skip to main content

American College of Cardiology

Article Metrics

A Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Cardiac Contractility Modulation

Overview of attention for article published in JACC: Heart Failure, October 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#45 of 731)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
63 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
A Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Cardiac Contractility Modulation
Published in
JACC: Heart Failure, October 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.jchf.2018.04.010
Pubmed ID
Authors

William T. Abraham, Karl-Heinz Kuck, Rochelle L. Goldsmith, JoAnn Lindenfeld, Vivek Y. Reddy, Peter E. Carson, Douglas L. Mann, Benjamin Saville, Helen Parise, Rodrigo Chan, Phi Wiegn, Jeffrey L. Hastings, Andrew J. Kaplan, Frank Edelmann, Lars Luthje, Rami Kahwash, Gery F. Tomassoni, David D. Gutterman, Angela Stagg, Daniel Burkhoff, Gerd Hasenfuß

Abstract

The authors sought to confirm a subgroup analysis of the prior FIX-HF-5 (Evaluate Safety and Efficacy of the OPTIMIZER System in Subjects With Moderate-to-Severe Heart Failure) study showing that cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) improved exercise tolerance (ET) and quality of life in patients with ejection fractions between 25% and 45%. CCM therapy for New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III and IV heart failure (HF) patients consists of nonexcitatory electrical signals delivered to the heart during the absolute refractory period. A total of 160 patients with NYHA functional class III or IV symptoms, QRS duration <130 ms, and ejection fraction ≥25% and ≤45% were randomized to continued medical therapy (control, n = 86) or CCM (treatment, n = 74, unblinded) for 24 weeks. Peak VO2 (primary endpoint), Minnesota Living With Heart Failure questionnaire, NYHA functional class, and 6-min hall walk were measured at baseline and at 12 and 24 weeks. Bayesian repeated measures linear modeling was used for the primary endpoint analysis with 30% borrowing from the FIX-HF-5 subgroup. Safety was assessed by the percentage of patients free of device-related adverse events with a pre-specified lower bound of 70%. The difference in peak VO2 between groups was 0.84 (95% Bayesian credible interval: 0.123 to 1.552) ml O2/kg/min, satisfying the primary endpoint. Minnesota Living With Heart Failure questionnaire (p < 0.001), NYHA functional class (p < 0.001), and 6-min hall walk (p = 0.02) were all better in the treatment versus control group. There were 7 device-related events, yielding a lower bound of 80% of patients free of events, satisfying the primary safety endpoint. The composite of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalizations was reduced from 10.8% to 2.9% (p = 0.048). CCM is safe, improves exercise tolerance and quality of life in the specified group of HF patients, and leads to fewer HF hospitalizations. (Evaluate Safety and Efficacy of the OPTIMIZER System in Subjects With Moderate-to-Severe Heart Failure; NCT01381172).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 63 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 50%
Unspecified 2 14%
Other 2 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 6 43%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 43%
Psychology 2 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 72. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 December 2018.
All research outputs
#196,914
of 12,381,422 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Heart Failure
#45
of 731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,022
of 270,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Heart Failure
#6
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,381,422 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 270,973 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.