Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37721634›Full record

ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2023

Accurate Classification of Non-ischemic Cardiomyopathy.

Yifan Wang, Hao Jia, Jiangping Song

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current cardiology reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Fibroblast activation protein-targeted PET/CT in multiple non-ischemic cardiomyopathies.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. CytoSorbBiomedicines · 2025
    Article
  13. Impact of catheter ablation on atrial fibrillation outcomes in various cardiomyopathies: findings from LGE-MRI quantified atrial fibrosis analysis.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Yifan Wang *Beijing Key Laboratory of Preclinical Research and Evaluation for Cardiovascular Implant Materials, Animal Experimental Centre, National Centre for Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Cardiac Surgery, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Fuwai Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100037, China.
Hao Jia *Beijing Key Laboratory of Preclinical Research and Evaluation for Cardiovascular Implant Materials, Animal Experimental Centre, National Centre for Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Cardiac Surgery, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Fuwai Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100037, China.
Jiangping SongBeijing Key Laboratory of Preclinical Research and Evaluation for Cardiovascular Implant Materials, Animal Experimental Centre, National Centre for Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Cardiac Surgery, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Fuwai Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100037, China. fwsongjiangping@126.com.

Funding

National Natural Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars of China 82125004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis article aims to review the accurate classification of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, including the methods, basis, subtype characteristics, and prognosis, especially the similarities and differences between different classifications. RECENT

findingsNon-ischemic cardiomyopathy refers to a myocardial disease that excludes coronary artery disease or ischemic injury and has a variety of etiologies and high incidence. Recent studies suggest that traditional classification methods based on primary/mixed/acquired or genetic/non-genetic cannot meet the precise needs of contemporary clinical management. This article systematically describes the history of classifications of cardiomyopathy and presents etiological and genetic differences between cardiomyopathies. The accurate classification is described from the perspective of morphology, function, and genomics in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, dilated cardiomyopathy, restrictive cardiomyopathy, arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy, left ventricular noncompaction, and partially acquired cardiomyopathy. The different clinical characteristics and treatment needs of these cardiomyopathies are elaborated. Some single-gene mutant cardiomyopathies have unique phenotypes, and some cardiomyopathies have mixed phenotypes. These special classifications require personalized precision treatment, which is worthy of independent research. This article describes recent advances in the accurate classification of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy from clinical phenotypes and causative genes, discusses the advantages and usage scenarios of each classification, compares the differences in prognosis and patient management needs of different subtypes, and summarizes common methods and new exploration directions for accurate classification.

Indexed as

CardiomyopathiesCardiomyopathy, DilatedCardiomyopathy, HypertrophicCardiomyopathy, RestrictiveHumansPhenotypeArrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathyDilated cardiomyopathyHypertrophic cardiomyopathyLeft ventricular noncompactionNon-ischemia cardiomyopathyRestrictive cardiomyopathy

Identifiers

PMID37721634
PMCPMC10651539

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.