ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2019
Low dose wall motion score predicts the short and long-term benefit of surgical revascularization in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2019. 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.
- The Utility of Low-Dose-Dobutamine Stress Echocardiography in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: An Update.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Low-dose dobutamine stress gated blood pool SPECT assessment of left ventricular contractile reserve in ischemic cardiomyopathy: a feasibility study.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the influence of the extent of viability using low dose dobutamine wall motion score index (WMS) on the survival benefit of surgical revascularization (CABG) versus medical therapy. In the STICH trial, viability assessment was not helpful in determining the benefit of CABG. However, the extent of viable myocardium with contractile function was not assessed in the trial. Dobutamine echocardiography was performed in 250 patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction (125-medically treated, 125-CABG). The mean ejection fraction (EF) was 32% in both groups. WMS during low dose dobutamine infusion was used to classify patients into groups with extensive (WMS < 2.00), intermediate (WMS 2.00-2.49), and limited (WMS ≥ 2.50) viability. Survival free of cardiac death was assessed at 2 years and for the complete duration of follow-up. There were 44 (35.2%) and 67 (53.6%) cardiac deaths in the revascularized and medically treated patients respectively (follow-up of 5.7 ± 5.8 years). Revascularized and medically treated patients with extensive viability had similar 2-year survival (p = 0.567) but revascularized patients had improved long-term survival (p = 0.0001). In those with intermediate viability, revascularization improved both 2 year (p = 0.014) and long-term survival (p = 0.0001). In patients with limited viability, 2-year survival was worse in revascularized patients (p = 0.04) and long-term survival was similar (p = 0 .25) in revascularized and medically treated groups. Patients with extensive and intermediate amounts of viability have improved survival with CABG but those with limited viability have poorer short-term outcome and no long-term benefit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31053980What 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.