ArticleJournal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis2022
Usefulness of Upstroke Time per Cardiac Cycle for Cardiovascular and All-Cause Mortality Prediction in Patients with Normal Ankle-Brachial Index.
Article in Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis, 2022. 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.
- Relation of glucose variability on mortality from any cause and cardiovascular diseases in individuals with type 2 diabetes: mediation analysis of echocardiographic parameters.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- Case report: a case of masked subclavian artery stenosis in a haemodialysis patient.European heart journal. Case reports · 2024Article
- Upstroke time is a more useful marker of atherosclerosis than percentage of mean arterial pressure for detecting coronary artery disease in subjects with a normal ankle-brachial index.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024Article
- Can Upstroke Time be a More Significant Predictor for Cardiovascular Disease Than Ankle-Brachial Index?Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimAbnormal ankle-brachial index (ABI) is regarded as peripheral artery disease and can be used to predict cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. However, the usefulness of ABI for the prediction of CV outcome in patients with normal ABI is limited. Upstroke time per cardiac cycle (UTCC) is recently reported to be associated with mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction and the elderly. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate UTCC, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV), and ABI for the prediction of mortality in patients with normal ABI.
methodsPatients arranged for echocardiographic examinations were enrolled, and 1076 patients with normal ABI were included. ABI, baPWV, and UTCC were measured by an ABI-form device.
resultsThe median follow-up to mortality was 95 months. There were 88 CV and 244 all-cause deaths. After multivariate analysis, UTCC was associated with increased CV and all-cause mortality (P ≤ 0.004). Age, diabetes, heart failure, left ventricular hypertrophy, baPWV, and LVEF were also independent predictors of CV and all-cause mortality, but ABI was not. Furthermore, UTCC had a better additive predictive value than ABI, baPWV, and LVEF for CV mortality ( P ≤ 0.012). It also had a better additive predictive value than ABI and LVEF for all-cause mortality (P ≤ 0.013).
conclusionsUTCC is an independent predictor for CV and all-cause mortality in patients with normal ABI. It also has a better additive predictive value of CV and all-cause mortality than ABI and LVEF. Therefore, UTCC is a simple, novel, and useful parameter for identifying high-risk patients with normal ABI.
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.