Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24935218›Full record

ArticleHeart and vessels2015

Risk factors for rehospitalization in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction compared with reduced ejection fraction.

Masahiko Setoguchi, Yuji Hashimoto, Taro Sasaoka, Takashi Ashikaga, Mitsuaki Isobe

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Heart and vessels, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Coronary flow reserve evaluated by phase-contrast cine cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging of coronary sinus: a meta-analysis.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of coronary flow reserve improves risk stratification in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  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

5 authors.

Masahiko SetoguchiDepartment of Cardiology, Kameda General Hospital, Kamogawa, Japan. setocvm@tmd.ac.jp.
Yuji HashimotoDepartment of Cardiology, Kameda General Hospital, Kamogawa, Japan.
Taro SasaokaDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan.
Takashi AshikagaDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan.
Mitsuaki IsobeDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan. isobemi@tmd.ac.jp.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although there have been several studies regarding heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), investigations of the risk factors for readmission of Japanese patients with HFpEF remain scarce. Therefore, our goal was to identify the risk factors for readmission of Japanese patients with heart failure (HF), particularly those with HFpEF. We analyzed 310 patients who were hospitalized for the first time with HF. Preserved EF was defined EF ≥50 %, and reduced EF (rEF) was EF <50 %. The study endpoint was readmission for HF after discharge. Medical history, vital signs, electrocardiograms, chest radiographs, blood tests and echocardiograms were compared between patients with HFpEF and with HFrEF. Among the 142 patients who had HFpEF, 43 reached the endpoint within 1 year. Multivariate analysis revealed depression (HR: 7.185), high brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels at discharge (HR: 1.003), and dilated inferior vena cava (HR: 1.100) as independent risk factors for readmission. In contrast, 39 of the 168 patients with HFrEF reached the endpoint. Risk factors for readmission of HFrEF patients were low sodium (HR: 0.856), high blood urea nitrogen (HR: 1.045), high BNP levels at discharge (HR: 1.003) and absence of beta-blocker prescription (HR: 0.395). In conclusion, our study suggests that the predictors of HF readmission differ between HFpEF and HFrEF patients.

Indexed as

Risk AssessmentAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHeart FailureHumansMalePatient DischargePatient ReadmissionPrognosisRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsStroke VolumeVentricular Function, LeftDepressionHeart failure with preserved ejection fractionInferior vena cavaReadmission

Identifiers

PMID24935218

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.