ArticlePloS one2024
Clinical value of the fibrosis-4 index in predicting mortality in patients with right ventricular pacing.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Fibrosis-4 index is closely associated with future development of hypertension in the Japanese general population.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) index has attracted attention as a predictive factor for cardiovascular events and mortality in patients with heart disease. However, its clinical value in patients with implanted pacemakers remains unclear.
methodsThis study included patients who underwent pacemaker implantation. The FIB-4 index was calculated based on blood tests performed during the procedure. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcomes included cardiovascular death, non-cardiovascular death, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; composite of cardiovascular death, heart failure hospitalization, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke). The FIB-4 index was stratified into tertiles. Between-group comparisons were performed using log-rank tests and multivariate analysis using Cox proportional hazards. The predictive accuracy and cut-off value of the FIB-4 index were calculated from the receiver operating characteristic curve for all-cause mortality. Finally, based on the calculated cut-off values, the patients were divided into two groups for outcome validation and subgroup analysis.
resultsThis study included 201 participants, of whom 38 experienced death during the observation period (median: 1097 days). All-cause mortality, non-cardiovascular death, and MACE differed significantly between groups stratified by the FIB-4 index tertiles (log-rank test: P<0.001, P<0.001, and P = 0.045, respectively). Using Cox proportional hazards analysis, the unadjusted hazard ratio was 4.75 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.05-11.0, P<0.001) for Tertile 3 compared to Tertile 1. After adjustment for confounding factors, including sex, the presence or absence of left bundle branch block at baseline, QRS duration during pacing, and pacing rate at the last check, the hazard ratio was 4.79 (95% CI: 2.04-11.2, P<0.001). The cut-off value of the FIB-4 index was 3.75 (area under the curve: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.62-0.82).
conclusionsIn patients with pacemakers, the FIB-4 index may be a predictor of early all-cause mortality, with a cut-off value of 3.75.
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.