ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2023
Clinical significance of the hemodynamic gain index in patients undergoing exercise stress testing and coronary computed tomography angiography.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany hemodynamic parameters provide limited information regarding obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) during exercise stress testing particularly when exercise is suboptimal. Hemodynamic gain index (HGI) is a recent sensitive indicator of ischemia and has been associated with increased mortality. This study evaluated the clinical impact of HGI in patients who underwent concomitant exercise stress testing and coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA).
methodsA total of 284 consecutive patients from the executive health program between 2010 and 2018 were identified. Resting and peak heart rate (HR) as well as systolic blood pressure (SBP) measurements were recorded. Framingham risk score (FRS), Duke treadmill score (DTS) and HGI [Formula: see text] were calculated. The latter was divided into quartiles. CCTA was used as a reference test to detect any CAD. Multivariate analysis and artificial neural network were used to determine the independent predictors of obstructive CAD.
resultsMean age was 53 ± 12 years with 83% male. Mean HGI was 1.74 ± 0.67, with cut-off value of severely blunted HGI ≤ 1.25 (Quartile 4). Patients with severely blunted HGI were older, had higher FRS, and worse DTS. Patients with obstructive CAD had lower HGI when compared to those with normal CCTA/non-obstructive CAD (1.36 ± 0.53 vs. 1.77 ± 0.67, P = 0.005), and showed a higher prevalence of severely blunted HGI (44% vs. 22%, P = 0.019). After adjusting for traditional risk factors, HGI remained an independent predictor of obstructive CAD while severely blunted HGI was associated with threefold increased odds of having obstructive CAD (P = 0.05). Using artificial intelligence analysis, severely blunted HGI independently predicted obstructive CAD with an area under the curve of 0.83 and 0.96, and normalized importance of HGI of 100% and 63%, respectively for different models.
conclusionsAmong patients who underwent concomitant exercise stress testing and CCTA, severely blunted HGI independently predicted obstructive CAD after multivariate adjustment for traditional risk factors.
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.