ArticleCardiovascular ultrasound2023
Echocardiographic reference ranges for noninvasive left ventricular 18-segment myocardial work index and work efficiency in a healthy Asian population.
Article in Cardiovascular ultrasound, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Left ventricular hypertrophy and myocardial work in amateur marathon runners.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Myocardial Work Indices in Patients Recently Recovered from Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Global and regional myocardial function assessment in symptomatic patients with chronic coronary syndrome using longitudinal strain and noninvasive myocardial work.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLeft ventricular (LV) myocardial work index (WI) and work efficiency (WE) have become the latest indicators for assessing LV function. Reference ranges for normal LV segmental WI and WE have not been established.
methodsFour hundred eleven healthy Asian subjects (47% men, median age: 35 years) were enrolled prospectively. WI and WE were analysed using the LV pressure-strain loop (LVPSL) with specific software.
resultsWI and WE differed significantly between segments as well as between walls and levels of the left ventricle. The anteroseptal basal segment had the lowest WI and WE (1440 mmHg ± 324 and 92% [88-96], respectively) among the eighteen segments. Significant WI and WE differences were found between sexes and age groups. No correlation was observed between age groups and the average WI of any wall or level in men, while the average WI of several different walls and levels in women showed significant differences between age groups. The average WI of most walls and levels increased with age in women. No correlation was found between age groups and the average WE of any wall or level in either men or women.
conclusionsThis study establishes the normal reference values of WI and WE of eighteen segments for clinical work and clinical experiments. There were significant differences in WI and WE between segments, levels, and walls of the normal left ventricle. Sex should be considered when analysing WI and WE. Age should be considered when analysing WI in women.
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.