ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2021
Associations Between Clinical Outcomes and a Recently Proposed Adult Congenital Heart Disease Anatomic and Physiological Classification System.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2021. 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.
- The Heart of Fetal Growth Restriction: Congenital Heart Defects-An Analysis of Risk Factors and Morbidity Outcomes.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Influenza Vaccination in Adult Patients With Congenital Heart Disease.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
- Feasibility and Findings of Including Self-Identified Adult Congenital Heart Disease Patients in the INVESTED Trial.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
- The Adult Congenital Heart Disease Anatomic and Physiological Classification: Associations with Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Atrial Arrhythmias.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology consensus guidelines introduce an adult congenital heart disease anatomic and physiological (AP) classification system. We assessed the association between AP classification and clinical outcomes. Methods and Results Data were collected for 1000 outpatients with ACHD prospectively enrolled between 2012 and 2019. AP classification was assigned based on consensus definitions. Primary outcomes were (1) all-cause mortality and (2) a composite of all-cause mortality or nonelective cardiovascular hospitalization. Cox regression models were developed for AP classification, each component variable, and additional clinical models. Discrimination was assessed using the Harrell C statistic. Over a median follow-up of 2.5 years (1.4-3.9 years), the composite outcome occurred in 185 participants, including 49 deaths. Moderately or severely complex anatomic class (class II/III) and severe physiological stage (stage D) had increased risk of the composite outcome (AP class IID and IIID hazard ratio, 4.46 and 3.73, respectively, versus IIC). AP classification discriminated moderately between patients who did and did not suffer the composite outcome (C statistic, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.67-0.71]), similar to New York Heart Association functional class and NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide); it was more strongly associated with mortality (C statistic, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.78-0.84]), as were NT-proBNP and functional class. A model with AP class and NT-proBNP provided the strongest discrimination for the composite outcome (C statistic, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.71-0.75]) and mortality (C statistic, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.82-0.88]). Conclusions The addition of physiological stage modestly improves the discriminative ability of a purely anatomic classification, but simpler approaches offer equivalent prognostic information. The AP system may be improved by addition of key variables, such as circulating biomarkers, and by avoiding categorization of continuous variables.
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.