Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10409534›Full record

ArticleHeart (British Cardiac Society)1999

Risk stratification after acute myocardial infarction by Doppler stroke distance measurement.

R J Trent, J M Rawles

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Heart (British Cardiac Society), 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

R J TrentDepartment of Cardiology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK.
J M Rawles

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo establish the value of Doppler stroke distance measurement as a predictor of mortality risk following acute myocardial infarction.

designFollow up study.

settingCoronary care unit of a teaching and district general hospital. SUBJECTS: 378 patients (mean age 61 years) with acute myocardial infarction followed up for a mean of five years (range 2-7 years); 299 (79%) patients received thrombolysis.

main outcome measuresStroke distance (the systolic velocity integral of blood flow in the aortic arch (percentage of age predicted normal value)); presence or absence of left ventricular failure on the admission chest radiograph; the codified admission ECG; death during follow up.

resultsMean (SD) stroke distance was 81 (19)% and five year survival 76%. For patients with stroke distance > 100% (n = 60), 82-100% (n = 134), 63-81% (n = 122), and < 63% (n = 62), the one month mortality rates were 0%, 1.5%, 4%, and 18%, respectively; the corresponding estimates for mortality at five years were 17%, 19%, 24%, and 43%. Survival was independently related to age (p < 0.0001), stroke distance (p < 0.0001), and chest radiograph appearance (p = 0.002), but not to ECG codes (p = 0.31) or receipt of thrombolysis (p = 0.60). The areas under receiver operator characteristic plots for stroke distance measurements were 82%, 76%, 71%, and 65% for deaths within one month, six months, one year, and two years, respectively.

conclusionsThe bedside measurement of stroke distance stratifies mortality risk after acute myocardial infarction. The predictive ability of this simple measure of left ventricular systolic function compares well with published accounts of the more complex measurement of ejection fraction.

Indexed as

Ventricular Function, LeftAgedEchocardiography, DopplerElectrocardiographyFollow-Up StudiesHumansMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionPoint-of-Care SystemsPredictive Value of TestsRegression AnalysisROC CurveStroke VolumeSurvival Rate

Identifiers

PMID10409534
PMCPMC1729154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.