ArticleESC heart failure2022
Sex differences in natural history of cardiovascular magnetic resonance- and biopsy-proven lymphocytic myocarditis.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Women's heart and echocardiography.Journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2026Review
- Acute and Chronic Myocarditis in Men and Women.Current heart failure reports · 2026Review
- T cells in acute and chronic myocarditis: from diagnosis to treatment.European heart journal · 2026Review
- Racial and sex differences in acute pericarditis among emergency department chest pain patients: a retrospective cohort study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Review
- Unveiling the invisible: Is there a role of CMR in biopsy-negative graft dysfunction post-heart transplantation?ESC heart failure · 2024Article
- Review
- Sex differences in natural history of cardiovascular magnetic resonance- and biopsy-proven lymphocytic myocarditis.ESC heart failure · 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
10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe role of sex in determining the profile and the outcomes of patients with myocarditis is largely unexplored. We evaluated the impact of sex as a modifier factor in the clinical characterization and natural history of patients with definite diagnosis of myocarditis. METHODS AND
resultsWe retrospectively analysed a single-centre cohort of consecutive patients with definite diagnosis of myocarditis (i.e. endomyocardial biopsy or cardiac magnetic resonance proven). Specific sub-analyses were performed in cohorts of patients with chest pain, ventricular arrhythmias, and heart failure as different main symptoms at presentation. The primary outcome measure was a composite of all-cause mortality or heart transplantation (HTx). We included 312 patients, of which 211, 68% of the whole population, were males. Despite no clinically relevant differences found at baseline presentation, males had a higher indexed left ventricular end-diastolic volume (62 ± 23 mL/m2 vs. 52 ± 20 mL/m2, P = 0.011 in males vs. females, respectively) at follow-up evaluation. At a median follow-up of 72 months, 36 (17%) males vs. 8 (8%) females experienced death or HTx (P = 0.033). Male sex emerged as predictors of all-cause mortality or HTx in every combination of covariates (HR 2.600; 1.163-5.809; P = 0.020). Results were agreeable regardless of the main symptom of presentation.
conclusionsIn a large cohort of patients with definite diagnosis of myocarditis, females experienced a more favourable long-term prognosis than males, despite a similar clinical profile at presentation.
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.