ArticlePloS one2022
A comparison of echocardiographic and circulating cardiac biomarkers for predicting incident cardiovascular disease.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Atrial cardiomyopathy and incident ischemic stroke risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of neurology · 2023Pooled it
- The Role of NT-proBNP Levels in the Diagnosis of Hypertensive Heart Disease.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Soluble Urokinase-Type Plasminogen Activator Receptor (suPAR) Is a Biomarker Associated with Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in the Elderly, Specifically in Women.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEchocardiographic measures are known predictors of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the general population. This study compared the predictive value of such measures to that of circulating cardiac biomarkers for a composite cardiovascular disease outcome in an aging population.
methodsIn this prospective population-based cohort study, echocardiography was performed at baseline together with assessments of traditional CVD risk factors and circulating cardiac biomarkers, NT-proBNP and troponin I, in 1016 individuals all aged 70 years. Assessments were repeated at ages 75 and 80. A composite CVD outcome (myocardial infarction, heart failure or ischemic stroke) was charted over 15 years. All echocardiography variables, except for the E/A ratio, were analyzed on a continuous scale.
resultsOver 10 years, left atrial (LA) diameter, left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and high E/A ratio (>1.5) increased, while left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remained unchanged. Using Cox proportional hazard analyses with time-updated variables for echocardiographic measures and traditional risk factors, an enlarged LA diameter and a low LVEF were independently related to incident CVD in 222 participants. The addition of LA diameter and LVEF to traditional risk factors increased the C-statistic by 1.5% (p = 0.008). However, the addition of troponin I and NT-proBNP to traditional risk factors increased the C-statistic by 3.0% (p<0.001).
conclusionAn enlarged LA diameter and a low LVEF improved the prediction of incident CVD compared to traditional risk factors. However, given that troponin I and NT-proBNP improved prediction to a similar extent, the use of simple blood tests to improve clinical cardiovascular disease risk prediction is only further supported by this study.
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.