Observational studyEuropean heart journal2013
Value of reserve pulse pressure in improving the risk stratification of patients with normal myocardial perfusion imaging.
Observational study in European heart journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor predicting reduction in pulse pressure after a one-hour rest in nurses working night shifts.Scientific reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate the incremental prognostic value of reserve-pulse pressure (reserve-PP: exercise-PP minus rest-PP) to standard risk factors among patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) but normal exercise myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). METHODS AND
resultsWe studied 4269 consecutive symptomatic patients without known CAD who were referred for exercise MPI but had normal MPI results (mean age 58 ± 12 years, 56% females, 84% referred for evaluation of chest pain or dyspnoea, 95% with intermediate pretest likelihood of CAD). There were 202 deaths over 5.1 ± 1.4 years of follow-up. Reserve-PP was abnormal (<44 mmHg increase in PP from rest) in 1894 patients (44%). Patients with an abnormal reserve-PP had a higher risk of death compared with patients with normal reserve-PP [hazard ratio (HR): 2.47, 95% CI, 1.8-3.3]. In multivariable models adjusting for age, sex, ejection fraction, medications, heart rate recovery, Duke treadmill score (DTS), and rest-PP, each 10 mmHg lower reserve-PP was associated with a 20.6% increase in risk-adjusted mortality (adjusted HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.76-0.91). Models incorporating reserve-PP significantly reclassified risk compared with models without these parameters (net reclassification index 14.3%, P = 0.0007; integrated discrimination index 0.69, P = 0.01).
conclusionIn patients without a history of CAD and a normal MPI, an abnormal reserve-PP identified and reclassified those at higher risk of death independent of known risk factors and DTS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.