Observational studyESC heart failure2023
Is vascular remodelling in patients with chronic heart failure exaggerated?
Observational study in ESC heart failure, 2023. 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.
- The association between pulse wave velocity and heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Different effects of mechano- and metaboreflex on the central blood pressure waveform.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Article
- Is vascular remodelling in patients with chronic heart failure exaggerated?ESC heart failure · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVascular remodelling of large arteries increases afterload of the left ventricle. The aim of this study was to analyse whether vascular remodelling and function under laboratory and 24-hour ambulatory conditions is impaired in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) independently of cardiovascular risk factors. METHODS AND
resultsIn this monocentric cross-sectional observational study, 105 patients with CHF and an ejection fraction ≤49% (CHF+) were compared to 118 subjects without CHF (CHF-). After adjustment for age, gender, arterial hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, type 2 diabetes, obesity and smoking, vascular function and structure parameters, as assessed by pulse wave analysis (SphygmoCor) and the UNEX EF device, respectively, between the CHF+ and the CHF- group differed for resting pulse wave velocity (PWV) (P = 0.010), 24-h ambulatory PWV (P = 0.011), central systolic blood pressure (cSBP) (P = <0.001), 24-h ambulatory cSBP (P = <0.001), resting central augmentation index (P = 0.002), and brachial intima-media thickness (P = 0.022). In CHF+ patients, higher levels of NT-proBNP, taken as a marker for the severity of CHF, were related to a higher PWV (r = 0.340, P = <0.001), a higher cSBP (r = 0.292, P = 0.005), and a trend to higher central pulse pressure (cPP) (r = 0.198, P = 0.058), higher 24-h brachial PP (r = 0.322, P = 0.002), and 24-h total peripheral resistance (s = 0.227, P = 0.041) after full adjustment for covariates.
conclusionsIn CHF+ patients we observed augmented vascular remodelling and functional impairment compared with CHF- patients independently of cardiovascular risk factors, age, and gender, and the extent of vascular remodelling and impairment was related to the severity of CHF.
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.