ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2021
Predicting mortality, thrombus recurrence and persistence in patients with post-acute myocardial infarction left ventricular thrombus.
Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Management of Antithrombotic Therapy in Left Ventricular Thrombus: A Position Paper of the Italian Society of Hemostasis and Thrombosis (SISET).Thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Guideline
- Clinical and Echocardiographic Factors Associated With Left Ventricular Thrombus Recurrence.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Impact of left ventricular ejection fraction on left ventricular thrombus resolution.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Observational
- Article
- Clinical characteristics and prognostic importance of anticoagulant use in ischemic left ventricular aneurysm: a retrospective cohort study.Nature communications · 2024Article
- A prediction model for left ventricular thrombus persistence/recurrence: based on a prospective study and a retrospective study.Thrombosis journal · 2023Article
- Clinical Outcome After Left Ventricular Thrombus Resolution: Who Needs Long-Term or Lifetime Use of Anticoagulants?Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Article
- Prognostic Value of Machine Learning in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022Article
- Clinical characteristics and prognosis of patients with left ventricular thrombus in East China.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- The need for nutritional assessment and interventions based on the prognostic nutritional index for patients with femoral fractures: a retrospective study.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2021Article
- Treatment of left ventricular thrombus after myocardial infarction: need longer or lifetime use of anticoagulants?ESC heart failure · 2021Article
- Stroke and Myocardial Infarction: A Bidirectional Mendelian Randomization Study.International journal of general medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Left ventricular thrombus (LVT) is a common complication of acute myocardial infarction and is associated with morbidity from embolic complications. Predicting which patients will develop death or persistent LVT despite anticoagulation may help clinicians identify high-risk patients. We developed a random forest (RF) model that predicts death or persistent LVT and evaluated its performance. This was a single-center retrospective cohort study in an academic tertiary center. We included 244 patients with LVT in our study. Patients who did not receive anticoagulation (n = 8) or had unknown (n = 31) outcomes were excluded. The primary outcome was a composite outcome of death, recurrent LVT and persistent LVT. We selected a total of 31 predictors collected at the point of LVT diagnosis based on clinical relevance. We compared conventional regularized logistic regression with the RF algorithm. There were 156 patients who had resolution of LVT and 88 patients who experienced the composite outcome. The RF model achieved better performance and had an AUROC of 0.700 (95% CI 0.553-0.863) on a validation dataset. The most important predictors for the composite outcome were receiving a revascularization procedure, lower visual ejection fraction (EF), higher creatinine, global wall motion abnormality, higher prothrombin time, higher body mass index, higher activated partial thromboplastin time, older age, lower lymphocyte count and higher neutrophil count. The RF model accurately identified patients with post-AMI LVT who developed the composite outcome. Further studies are needed to validate its use in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33389609What 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.