We only have this paper's title and publication details.
Read it at the sourceCaptured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“With optimal therapy applied to the right patient in the right manner at the right time, the risk of death can be markedly reduced, perhaps by as much as 50%. Treating fewer than 10 patients with all the correct therapies will easily save at least one life and one or more hospitalizations. Those are real benefits that dwarf the benefit of many of our other cardiovascular therapies.”
“For many years, we've functioned in a space where we thought there's not that much we can do for heart failure, and I would now argue stridently against that. You can see the incredibly low numbers needed to treat here. Only a handful of patients need to be exposed to these therapies to derive a significant benefit on mortality. These are data we should incorporate in our clinical practice without exclusion.”
“Our big picture approach was to make it clear that heart failure, classically regarded as a futile disease, now carries a more hopeful outlook. Patients can and should do better with this disease than before and the exhaustive burden of this disease can be lessened.”
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yancy et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: