ArticleHeart and vessels2011
Force-frequency relationship as a predictor of long-term prognosis in patients with heart diseases.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adequate evaluation of the nature of the residual failing myocardium, as well as the severity of myocardial injury, is important for managing patients with heart failure. The aim of this study was to investigate the myocardial function and the prognosis of patients with heart diseases using the force-frequency relationship (FFR). We enrolled 76 patients with sinus rhythm who had miscellaneous heart diseases and performed incremental right atrial pacing at the time of diagnostic cardiac catheterization. The first derivatives of left ventricular pressure (dP/dt) were recorded using a micro manometer-tipped catheter during the study. To represent properties of FFR, two parameters-the peak force rate (PFR) and force gain (FG)-were estimated. PFR was defined as the heart rate at which dP/dt became maximum. FG was defined as the difference between dP/dt at PFR and dP/dt at the basal heart rate. FG decreased as the severity of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction increased (372.0 ± 110.7, 209.5 ± 29.1 and 116.3 ± 13.1 mmHg/s for normal LV function, mild LV dysfunction and severe LV dysfunction groups, P < 0.05, respectively). PFR correlated with cardiac index (r = 0.375, P = 0.001). FG correlated with LV end systolic volume index (r = -0.297, P = 0.010) and LV ejection fraction (r = 0.539, P < 0.001). Furthermore, pulmonary arterial wedge pressure [hazard ratio (HR) 1.126, P < 0.01] and FG (HR 0.992, P = 0.061) tended to be independent predictors for cardiovascular death. Analysis of FFR, especially FG, seems to be useful to evaluate the nature of the failing myocardium and the prognosis of patients with heart diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20978893What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.