ArticleESC heart failure2020
Prognostic utility of diastolic dysfunction and speckle tracking echocardiography in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of danicamtiv, a novel cardiac myosin activator, in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: experimental data and clinical results from a phase 2a trial.European journal of heart failure · 2020Trial
- Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction worsens prognosis in patients with heart failure due to dilated cardiomyopathy.ESC heart failure · 2025Observational
- Challenges in Echocardiography for the Diagnosis and Prognosis of Non-Ischemic Hypertensive Heart Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Impact of Estimated Left Atrial Pressure on Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Outcome.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Hemoglobin A1c in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with preserved ejection fraction is an independent predictor of left ventricular myocardial deformation and tissue abnormalities.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2023Article
- Heart failure: an update from the last years and a look at the near future.ESC heart failure · 2022Review
- The loss of left atrial contractile function predicts a worse outcome in HFrEF patients.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Impact of Mental Stress and Anger on Indices of Diastolic Function in Patients With Heart Failure.Journal of cardiac failure · 2020Article
- Discrepancies in Assessing Diastolic Function in Pre-Clinical Heart Failure Using Different Algorithms-A Primary Care Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Prognostic utility of diastolic dysfunction and speckle tracking echocardiography in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.ESC heart failure · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsWe hypothesized that grading of diastolic dysfunction (DDF) according to two DDF grading algorithms and strain imaging yields prognostic information on all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND
resultsWe enrolled ambulatory HFrEF (left ventricular ejection fraction < 45%; N = 1 065) patients who underwent echocardiography and speckle tracking assessment of global longitudinal strain (GLS). Patients were stratified according to DDF grades (Grades I-III) according to two contemporary DDF grading algorithms. Prognostic performance was assessed by C-statistics. Of the originally 1 065 enrolled patients, a total of 645 (61%) patients (age: 67 ± 11 years, male: 72%, ejection fraction: 27 ± 9%) were classified according to both DDF grading algorithms. Concordance between the algorithms was moderate (kappa = 0.48) and the reclassification rate was 33%. During a median follow-up of 3.3 years (1.9, 4.7 years), 101 (16%) died from all causes. When comparing DDF Grade I vs. Grade III, both algorithms provided prognostic information [Nagueh: (hazard ratio) HR 2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI),1.32-3.31, P = 0.002; Johansen: HR 2.47, 95% CI, 1.57-3.87, P < 0.001]. However, when comparing DDF Grade II vs. Grade III, only the Johansen algorithm yielded prognostic information (Nagueh: HR 1.04, 95% CI, 0.60-1.77, P = 0.90; Johansen: HR 2.26, 95% CI, 1.35-3.77, P = 0.002). We found no difference in prognostic performance between the two algorithms (C-statistics: 0.604 vs. 0.623, P = 0.24). Assessed by C-statistics, the most powerful predictors of the endpoint from the two algorithms were E/e'-ratio (C-statistics: 0.644), tricuspid regurgitation velocity (C-statistics: 0.625) and E/A-ratio (C-statistics: 0.602). When adding GLS to a combination of these predictors, the prognostic performance increased significantly (C-statistics: 0.705 vs. C-statistics: 0.634, P = 0.028).
conclusionsEvaluation of DDF in patients with HFrEF yields prognostic information on all-cause mortality. Furthermore, adding GLS to contemporary algorithms of DDF adds novel prognostic information.
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.