ArticleESC heart failure2017
Worse prognosis of real-world patients with acute heart failure from the Czech AHEAD registry in comparison to patients from the RELAX-AHF trial.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modern-day cardio-oncology: a report from the 'Heart Failure and World Congress on Acute Heart Failure 2018'.ESC heart failure · 2018Review
- Metabolic disorders in heart failure and cancer.ESC heart failure · 2018Review
- Worse prognosis of real-world patients with acute heart failure from the Czech AHEAD registry in comparison to patients from the RELAX-AHF trial.ESC heart failure · 2017Article
- Relaxin-2 in Cardiometabolic Diseases: Mechanisms of Action and Future Perspectives.Frontiers in physiology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe randomized clinical trial RELAX-AHF demonstrated a positive effect of vasodilator therapy with serelaxin in the treatment of AHF patients. The aim of our study was to compare clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients from the AHEAD registry who met criteria of the RELAX-AHF trial (relax-comparable group) with the same characteristics and outcomes of patients from the AHEAD registry who did not meet those criteria (relax-non-comparable group), and finally with characteristics and outcomes of patients from the RELAX-AHF trial. METHODS AND
resultsA total of 5856 patients from the AHEAD registry (Czech registry of AHF) were divided into two groups according to RELAX-AHF criteria: relax-comparable (
conclusionsOnly about one in five of all evaluated patients met criteria for the potential treatment with the new vasodilator serelaxin. AHF patients from the real clinical practice had a higher mortality when compared with patients from the randomized clinical trial.
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.