Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22307667›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology2012

Assessing left ventricular systolic dysfunction after myocardial infarction: are ejection fraction and dP/dt(max) complementary or redundant?

Kiyotake Ishikawa, Elie R Chemaly, Lisa Tilemann, Kenneth Fish, Dennis Ladage, Jaime Aguero, Torsten Vahl, Carlos Santos-Gallego, Yoshiaki Kawase, Roger J Hajjar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kiyotake IshikawaCardiovascular Research Center, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York 10029-6574, USA.
Elie R Chemaly
Lisa Tilemann
Kenneth Fish
Dennis Ladage
Jaime Aguero
Torsten Vahl
Carlos Santos-Gallego
Yoshiaki Kawase
Roger J Hajjar
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · US

Funding

TRAINING PROGRAM IN MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR CARDIOLOGYT32HL007824 · NHLBI · MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE OF NYU · PI GELB, BRUCE D · 1995 to 2022
$8.6M
PICOT and Cardiac HypertrophyR01HL080498 · NHLBI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI HAJJAR, ROGER J. · 2006 to 2010
$2.2M
Targeting Calcium Cycling in Pre-Clinical Model CardiacR01HL083156 · NHLBI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI HAJJAR, ROGER J. · 2006 to 2010
$1.7M
C-TRIP: Targeted Gene Therapy for the Treatment of Heart Failure (P20)P20HL100396 · NHLBI · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI HAJJAR, ROGER J. · 2010 to 2011
$1.7M
Gene Therapy with Cardiotropic Vectors for the Treatment of Heart FailureR01HL088434 · NHLBI · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI HAJJAR, ROGER J. · 2010 to 2013
$1.7M
K and Ca Channels in Cardiac Hypertrophy and FailureR01HL071763 · NHLBI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI HAJJAR, ROGER J. · 2003 to 2006
$1.6M
Regression of cardiac hypertrophyR01HL093183 · NHLBI · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI HAJJAR, ROGER J. · 2009 to 2010
$1.1M
NHLBI NIH HHS HL-071763NHLBI NIH HHS HL-080498NHLBI NIH HHS HL-083156NHLBI NIH HHS HL-088434NHLBI NIH HHS P20-HL-100396NHLBI NIH HHS R01-HL-093183NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007824NHLBI NIH HHS T32-HL-007824
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Among the various cardiac contractility parameters, left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) and maximum dP/dt (dP/dt(max)) are the simplest and most used. However, these parameters are often reported together, and it is not clear if they are complementary or redundant. We sought to compare the discriminative value of EF and dP/dt(max) in assessing systolic dysfunction after myocardial infarction (MI) in swine. A total of 220 measurements were obtained. All measurements included LV volumes and EF analysis by left ventriculography, invasive ventricular pressure tracings, and echocardiography. Baseline measurements were performed in 132 pigs, and 88 measurements were obtained at different time points after MI creation. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves to distinguish the presence or absence of an MI revealed a good predictive value for EF [area under the curve (AUC): 0.998] but not by dP/dt(max) (AUC: 0.69, P < 0.001 vs. EF). Dividing dP/dt(max) by LV end-diastolic pressure and heart rate (HR) significantly increased the AUC to 0.87 (P < 0.001 vs. dP/dt(max) and P < 0.001 vs. EF). In naïve pigs, the coefficient of variation of dP/dt(max) was twice than that of EF (22.5% vs. 9.5%, respectively). Furthermore, in n = 19 pigs, dP/dt(max) increased after MI. However, echocardiographic strain analysis of 23 pigs with EF ranging only from 36% to 40% after MI revealed significant correlations between dP/dt(max) and strain parameters in the noninfarcted area (circumferential strain: r = 0.42, P = 0.05; radial strain: r = 0.71, P < 0.001). In conclusion, EF is a more accurate measure of systolic dysfunction than dP/dt(max) in a swine model of MI. Despite the variability of dP/dt(max) both in naïve pigs and after MI, it may sensitively reflect the small changes of myocardial contractility.

Indexed as

AnimalsArea Under CurveBlood PressureCardiac VolumeDiastoleHeart RateMyocardial ContractionMyocardial InfarctionROC CurveStroke VolumeSwineUltrasonographyVentricular Dysfunction, LeftVentricular Pressure

Identifiers

PMID22307667
PMCPMC3330783
OpenAlexW2143004507

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.