ArticleESC heart failure2024
Heart failure outcomes by left ventricular ejection fraction in a contemporary region-wide patient cohort.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2024. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of Left Heart Function in Heart Failure Patients with Different Ejection Fraction Types using a Transthoracic Three-dimensional Echocardiography Heart-Model.Current medical imaging · 2025Article
- Suspected de novo heart failure in outpatient care: the REVOLUTION HF study.European heart journal · 2025Article
- Heart failure outcomes by left ventricular ejection fraction in a contemporary region-wide patient cohort.ESC heart failure · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThis study aimed to characterize a contemporary population with subtypes of incident or prevalent heart failure (HF) based on reduced (HFrEF), mildly reduced, or preserved (HFpEF) left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and to assess how outcomes, healthcare, treatments, and healthcare costs vary between each subtype of incident HF. METHODS AND
resultsUsing Swedish data from the CardioRenal and Metabolic disease Heart Failure (CaReMe HF) study, updated to cover a more recent time period, this population-based study characterized patients from Stockholm County, Sweden, with incident HF (patients with a first HF diagnosis between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2019) or prevalent HF (patients with a first HF diagnosis before 1 January 2020). Patients with incident HF had LVEF measured by echocardiography within ±90 days of their first HF diagnosis, and patients with prevalent HF within 5 years prior to the index date. The 13 375 patients with prevalent HF (39.2% women, mean age 73.9 years) had multiple comorbidities (cardiovascular diseases, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, and cancer). These were already highly prevalent at the time of the first HF diagnosis in the 8042 patients with incident HF (40.5% women, mean age 72.3 years). Patients with incident HFpEF received less specialist HF care at outpatient secondary care facilities following their first HF diagnosis than those with incident HFrEF. Patients with HFrEF had higher risks of complications and exerted a higher burden, in terms of care for and costs of HF, on the healthcare system.
conclusionsThis study of contemporary patients with incident HF demonstrates that those with HFpEF and HFrEF differ considerably in terms of clinical presentation, prognosis, and care, highlighting a potential to improve HF outcomes.
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.