Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36451922›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022

Trajectories and determinants of left ventricular ejection fraction after the first myocardial infarction in the current era of primary coronary interventions.

Peter Wohlfahrt, Dominik Jenča, Vojtěch Melenovský, Marek Šramko, Martin Kotrč, Michael Želízko, Jolana Mrázková, Věra Adámková, Jan Pitha, Josef Kautzner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Peter WohlfahrtDepartment of Preventive Cardiology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Prague, Czechia.
Dominik JenčaDepartment of Cardiology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Prague, Czechia.
Vojtěch MelenovskýDepartment of Cardiology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Prague, Czechia.
Marek ŠramkoDepartment of Cardiology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Prague, Czechia.
Martin KotrčDepartment of Cardiology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Prague, Czechia.
Michael ŽelízkoDepartment of Cardiology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Prague, Czechia.
Jolana MrázkováDepartment of Cardiology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Prague, Czechia.
Věra AdámkováDepartment of Preventive Cardiology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Prague, Czechia.
Jan PithaDepartment of Cardiology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Prague, Czechia.
Josef KautznerDepartment of Cardiology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Prague, Czechia.
Institute of Clinical and Experimental Medicine · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) is an independent predictor of adverse outcomes after myocardial infarction (MI). However, current data on trajectories and determinants of EF are scarce. The present study aimed to describe the epidemiology of EF after MI. Methods: Data from a single-center prospectively-designed registry of consecutive patients hospitalized at a large tertiary cardiology center were utilized. Results: Out of 1,593 patients in the registry, 1,065 were hospitalized for MI type I (65.4% STEMI) and had no previous history of heart failure or MI. At discharge, EF < 40% was present in 238 (22.3%), EF 40-50% in 326 (30.6%) and EF > 50% in 501 (47.0%). Patients with EF < 40% were often those who suffered subacute and anterior STEMI, had higher heart rate at admission and higher maximal troponin level, and had more often HF signs requiring intravenous diuretics. Among subjects with EF < 40%, the follow-up EF was available in 166 (80% of eligible). Systolic function recovered to EF > 50% in 39 (23.1%), slightly improved to EF 40-50% in 44 (26.0%) and remained below 40% in 86 (50.9%). Systolic function improvement to EF > 40% was predicted by lower severity of coronary atherosclerosis, lower leukocyte count, and the absence of atrial fibrillation. Conclusions: Despite recent improvements in in-hospital MI care, one in five patients has systolic dysfunction at hospital discharge. Out of these, EF improves in 51%, and full recovery is observed in 23%. The severity of coronary atherosclerosis, inflammatory response to MI, and atrial fibrillation may affect EF recovery.

Indexed as

atrial fibrillationejection fraction (EF%)epidemiologyinflammationmyocardial infarctionsystolic dysfunction

Identifiers

PMID36451922
PMCPMC9702523
OpenAlexW4309012088

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.