Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35001562›Full record

Observational studyESC heart failure2022

Myocardial strain to identify benefit from beta-blockers in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Chan Soon Park, Jin Joo Park, In-Chang Hwang, Jun-Bean Park, Jae-Hyeong Park, Goo-Yeong Cho

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in ESC heart failure, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03513653 (Strain for Risk Assessment and Therapeutic Strategies in Patients With Acute Heart Failure), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03513653 unknown statusnot on this map

Strain for Risk Assessment and Therapeutic Strategies in Patients With Acute Heart Failure (STRATS-AHF) Registry

TypeobservationalSponsorSeoul National University HospitalRan2009 to 2023Enrolled4,312ConditionsHeart Failure Acute, Heart Failure, EchocardiographyArmsEchocardiography with speckle-tracking imaging
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chan Soon ParkDepartment of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Jin Joo ParkDivision of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Center & Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-9611-1490
In-Chang HwangDivision of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Center & Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
Jun-Bean ParkDepartment of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Jae-Hyeong ParkDepartment of Internal Medicine, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Chungnam National University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.
Goo-Yeong ChoDivision of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Center & Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
Seoul National University Hospital · KRSeoul National University Bundang Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsNot all patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) benefit equally from beta-blockers. Previous studies suggest that myocardial strain that reflects myocardial deformation may have a better prognostic value than the left ventricular ejection fraction. We aimed to evaluate the differential effect of beta-blockers according to the global longitudinal strain (GLS) in patients with HFrEF. METHODS AND

resultsOf the 4312 patients in the Strain for Risk Assessment and Therapeutic Strategies in Patients with Acute Heart Failure registry, we included 2126 HFrEF patients whose data on beta-blocker use and GLS were available. Patients were categorized into two groups: one group of patients had GLS ≥ 10%, and the other group had GLS < 10%. The primary outcome was 5 year all-cause mortality according to beta-blocker use. Of the 2126 patients with HFrEF, 526 (24.7%) and 1600 (75.3%) patients had GLS ≥ 10% and <10%, respectively. Overall, 1399 patients (65.8%) received beta-blockers, and 864 (40.6%) patients died during the 5 year follow-up. Beta-blocker use was associated with improved survival in patients with GLS < 10% in both the inverse probability treatment-weighted (hazard ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.59-0.83, P < 0.001) and Cox regression analyses (hazard ratio 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.59-0.81; P < 0.001). However, beta-blocker use was not associated with better survival in patients with GLS ≥ 10% in the inverse probability treatment-weighted and Cox regression analyses (both P > 0.05).

conclusionsBeta-blocker use appears to be associated with improved survival in patients with HFrEF and GLS < 10%, but this is not the case in patients with GLS ≥ 10%. Therefore, GLS may be used to identify patients who have attenuated benefits from beta-blockers in HFrEF. CLINICAL

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03513653 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03513653).

Indexed as

Heart FailureVentricular Dysfunction, LeftAdrenergic beta-AntagonistsHumansStroke VolumeVentricular Function, LeftAdrenergic beta-AntagonistsBeta-blockerHeart failure with reduced ejection fractionMortalityMyocardial strainPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID35001562
PMCPMC8934950
OpenAlexW4205255286

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.