ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Heart Failure Risk Predictions and Prognostic Factors in Adults With Congenital Heart Diseases.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Brazilian Guideline for Exercise Test in the Adult Population - 2024.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Guideline
- Predictors of Higher Peak Exercise Oxygen Uptake in a Cohort of Adult Patients with Fontan Circulation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Oxygen uptake efficiency slope at anaerobic threshold can predict peak VOInternational journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease · 2024Article
- Congenital Heart Disease: The State-of-the-Art on Its Pharmacological Therapeutics.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent decades the number of adults with congenital heart diseases (ACHD) has increased significantly. This entails the need for scrupulous evaluation of the current condition of these patients. The ACHD population is one of the most challenging in contemporary medicine, especially as well-known scales such as the NYHA classification have very limited application. At the moment, there is a lack of universal parameters or scales on the basis of which we can easily capture the moment of deterioration of our ACHD patients' condition. Hence it is crucial to identify factors that are widely available, cheap and easy to use. There are studies showing more and more potential prognostic factors that may be of use in clinical practice: thorough assessment with echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging (e.g., anatomy, ventricular function, longitudinal strain, shunt lesions, valvular defects, pericardial effusion, and pulmonary hypertension), cardiopulmonary exercise testing (e.g., peak oxygen uptake, ventilatory efficiency, chronotropic incompetence, and saturation) and biomarkers (e.g., N-terminal pro-brain type natriuretic peptide, growth-differentiation factor 15, high-sensitivity troponin T, red cell distribution width, galectin-3, angiopoietin-2, asymmetrical dimethylarginine, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein). Some of them are very promising, but more research is needed to create a specific panel on the basis of which we will be able to assess patients with specific congenital heart diseases.
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.