ArticleBMJ open2022
Gender discrepancy in the predictive effect of aortic root diameter on incidence of cardiovascular events among rural Northeast Chinese.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Correlation of aortic root dimensions and mortality in acute heart failure: A nationwide prospective cohort study.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Echocardiographic Phenotypes of Subclinical Organ Damage: Clinical and Prognostic Value in the General Population. Findings from the Pamela Study.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2023Review
- Aortic dilatation and cardiovascular events: a new piece of the puzzle?Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe possible predictive effect of echocardiographic aortic root diameter (ARD) on the incidence of cardiovascular events (CVEs) in a large, general population is limited. In addition, there is a lack of data about rural participants. We intend to figure out the possible relationship between ARD and the incidence of CVEs among the general population from rural China.
designPopulation-based cohort study.
settingRural areas in Liaoning Province, Northeast China.
participantsAt baseline, 9810 participants (mean age 53±10, 49.1% male) were enrolled in the Northeast China Rural Cardiovascular Health Study between 2012 and 2017.
main outcome measuresCardiac ultrasonography, lifestyle, medical history, laboratory testing, blood pressure, weight and height. ARD measurement was conducted at the level of the sinuses of Valsalva. Furthermore, the ARD was indexed to height or body surface area.
resultsDuring a median follow-up of 4.66 years, 550 non-fatal or fatal CVEs were recorded. Adjusting for blood pressure, age, total cholesterol, fasting blood glucose, estimated glomerular filtration rate, current smoking and drinking, previous cardiovascular diseases and antihypertensive treatment; ARD/height (HR per 1-unit increase=1.781, 95% CI: 1.160 to 2.736, p=0.008) was associated with an increased risk of CVEs in men only. The combination of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and aortic dilation was an independent and powerful predictor for cardiovascular prognosis compared with aortic dilation alone in men but not in women.
conclusionsOur study enrols a large sample of rural Chinese residents, and first confirms that ARD/height has a predictive effect on the incidence of CVEs among rural Chinese residents. The combination of LVH and aortic dilation is synergistic, which increases its predictive effect on CVEs in men only, suggesting that aortic dilatation predicts cardiovascular prognosis better than LVH does in men but not 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.