Why the study?
Recent advances in imaging, molecular understanding, and therapeutic options in HCM prompted a systematic review to identify consensus and discrepant areas across clinical practice guidelines.
Comparison
ESC (2023) vs AHA/ACC et al. (2024) vs JCS/JHFS (2018) guidelines
Design
Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines
Key result
A systematic review of 3 major clinical practice guidelines for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy found broad consensus on management but variations in sudden cardiac death risk assessment.
Authors
Loading...
Variations in sudden cardiac death risk assessment across hypertrophic cardiomyopathy guidelines may cause inconsistent stratification; challenges consensus and leaves open the need for harmonized criteria.
Systematic Review
Contemporary guidelines for HCM show broad consensus on diagnosis and management, but notable variations remain in sudden cardiac death risk assessment and diagnostic criteria.
Sanghvi et al. (2024) conducted a systematic review in Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Clinical practice guidelines was evaluated on Consensus and discrepant areas in the clinical practice guidelines. A systematic review of 3 major clinical practice guidelines for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy found broad consensus on management but variations in sudden cardiac death risk assessment.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: