Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24759949›Full record

ArticleArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2014

NHETS - Necropsy Heart Transplantation Study.

Thiago Ninck Valette, Silvia Moreira Ayub-Ferreira, Luiz Alberto Benvenuti, Victor Sarli Issa, Fernando Bacal, Paulo Roberto Chizzola, Germano Emilio Conceição Souza, Alfredo Inácio Fiorelli, Ronaldo Honorato Barros dos Santos, Edimar Alcides Bocchi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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.

Thiago Ninck ValetteInstituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Silvia Moreira Ayub-FerreiraInstituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Luiz Alberto BenvenutiInstituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Victor Sarli IssaInstituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Fernando BacalInstituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Paulo Roberto ChizzolaInstituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Germano Emilio Conceição SouzaInstituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Alfredo Inácio FiorelliInstituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Ronaldo Honorato Barros dos SantosInstituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Edimar Alcides BocchiInstituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiscrepancies between pre and post-mortem diagnoses are reported in the literature, ranging from 4.1 to 49.8 % in cases referred for necropsy, with important impact on patient treatment.

objectiveTo analyze patients who died after cardiac transplantation and to compare the pre- and post-mortem diagnoses.

methodsPerform a review of medical records and analyze clinical data, comorbidities, immunosuppression regimen, laboratory tests, clinical cause of death and cause of death at the necropsy. Then, the clinical and necroscopic causes of death of each patient were compared.

results48 deaths undergoing necropsy were analyzed during 2000-2010; 29 (60.4 %) had concordant clinical and necroscopic diagnoses, 16 (33.3%) had discordant diagnoses and three (6.3%) had unclear diagnoses. Among the discordant ones, 15 (31.3%) had possible impact on survival and one (2.1%) had no impact on survival. The main clinical misdiagnosis was infection, with five cases (26.7 % of discordant), followed by hyperacute rejection, with four cases (20 % of the discordant ones), and pulmonary thromboembolism, with three cases (13.3% of discordant ones).

conclusionDiscrepancies between clinical diagnosis and necroscopic findings are commonly found in cardiac transplantation. New strategies to improve clinical diagnosis should be made, considering the results of the necropsy, to improve the treatment of heart failure by heart transplantation.

Indexed as

AutopsyCause of DeathAdultDiagnostic ErrorsFemaleHeart TransplantationHumansMaleMedical RecordsMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSurvivalTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID24759949
PMCPMC4051454

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.