Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

69 questions · 69 findings · 16 reviews · Heart

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 12 · 17.4%GRADE not reported 1 · 1.4%Very low 10 · 14.5%Low 22 · 31.9%Moderate 20 · 29%High 4 · 5.8%

Lidocaine vs pirmenol

Ventricular fibrillation · patients with myocardial infarction

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic lidocaine for myocardial infarction 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Pre‐hospital vs in‐hospital thrombolysis

Adverse effects ‐ ventricular Fribrillation · participants with ST‐elevation myocardial infarction

Pre‐hospital showed no clear difference in adverse effects ‐ ventricular Fribrillation compared with in‐hospital thrombolysis (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pre‐hospital versus in‐hospital thrombolysis for ST‐elevation myocardial infarction 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 2.73 [0.68, 10.86]
2 studies · 178 participants
Low

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation vs usual care

Mortality due to all causes ‐ not reported · people with implantable ventricular assist devices

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation for people with implantable ventricular assist devices 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation vs usual care

Cardiovascular mortality ‐ not measured · people with implantable ventricular assist devices

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation for people with implantable ventricular assist devices 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation vs usual care

Rehospitalisation due to cardiovascular event ‐ not reported · people with implantable ventricular assist devices

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation for people with implantable ventricular assist devices 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation vs usual care

Serious adverse events: infection · people with implantable ventricular assist devices

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation for people with implantable ventricular assist devices 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation vs usual care

Health‐related quality of life · people with implantable ventricular assist devices

1 finding from 1 review

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation for people with implantable ventricular assist devices 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 37 participants
Very low

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation vs usual care

Heart transplantation ‐ not reported · people with implantable ventricular assist devices

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation for people with implantable ventricular assist devices 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation vs usual care

Costs ‐ not reported · people with implantable ventricular assist devices

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation for people with implantable ventricular assist devices 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Adenosine vs calcium channel blockers

Odds of reversion · patients with supraventricular tachycardia

1 finding from 1 review

Adenosine versus intravenous calcium channel antagonists for supraventricular tachycardia 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
622 participants
Moderate

Adenosine vs calcium channel blockers

Major adverse event: hypotension · patients with supraventricular tachycardia

1 finding from 1 review

Adenosine versus intravenous calcium channel antagonists for supraventricular tachycardia 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
306 participants
Low

Adenosine vs calcium channel blockers

Length of hospital stay · patients with supraventricular tachycardia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Adenosine versus intravenous calcium channel antagonists for supraventricular tachycardia 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Adenosine vs calcium channel blockers

Patient satisfaction · patients with supraventricular tachycardia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Adenosine versus intravenous calcium channel antagonists for supraventricular tachycardia 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Prophylactic levosimendan vs usual care

All‐cause mortality · paediatric patients following heart surgery

Prophylactic levosimendan showed no clear difference in mortality compared with standard treatment (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic levosimendan for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in paediatric patients… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.47 [0.12, 1.82]
3 studies · 123 participants
Low

Prophylactic levosimendan vs usual care

Low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) · paediatric patients following heart surgery

Prophylactic levosimendan showed no clear difference in low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) compared with standard treatment (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic levosimendan for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in paediatric patients… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.64 [0.39, 1.04]
2 studies · 83 participants
Low

Prophylactic levosimendan vs usual care

Duration of ICU stay · paediatric patients following heart surgery

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic levosimendan for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in paediatric patients… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
4 studies · 188 participants
Low

Prophylactic levosimendan vs usual care

Length of hospital stay · paediatric patients following heart surgery

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic levosimendan for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in paediatric patients… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 75 participants
Low

Prophylactic levosimendan vs usual care

Duration of mechanical ventilation · paediatric patients following heart surgery

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic levosimendan for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in paediatric patients… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
5 studies · 208 participants
Low

Prophylactic levosimendan vs usual care

Mechanical circulatory support or cardiac transplantation · paediatric patients following heart surgery

Prophylactic levosimendan showed no clear difference in mechanical circulatory support or cardiac transplantation compared with standard treatment (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic levosimendan for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in paediatric patients… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.49 [0.19, 11.37]
2 studies · 60 participants
Low

Intervention not reported

All‐cause mortality Median · adults older than 18 years, with no restriction regarding presence of ASCVD; participants generally had elevated risk of ASCVD (as…

The intervention showed no clear difference in all‐cause mortality Median (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed‐dose combination therapy for the prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.1 [0.64, 1.89]
5 studies · 5300 participants
Low