Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38838029›Full record

ArticleClinical cardiology2024

PREDICT HF: Risk stratification in advanced heart failure using novel hemodynamic parameters.

Nicole Cyrille-Superville, Sriram D Rao, Jason P Feliberti, Priyesh A Patel, Kamala Swayampakala, Shashank S Sinha, Eric I Jeng, Rohan M Goswami, David F Snipelisky, Aubrie M Carroll and 4 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Transition to Advanced Heart Failure: From Identification to Improving Prognosis.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

14 authors.

Nicole Cyrille-SupervilleSanger Heart and Vascular Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA.
Sriram D RaoDepartment of Medicine, Medstar Washington Hospital Center, Division of Cardiology, Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Jason P FelibertiUniversity of South Florida Heart and Vascular Institute, Transplant Cardiology, Tampa, Florida, USA.
Priyesh A PatelSanger Heart and Vascular Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA.
Kamala SwayampakalaSanger Heart and Vascular Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA.
Shashank S SinhaInova Heart and Vascular Institute, Inova Fairfax Medical Campus, Falls Church, Virginia, USA.
Eric I JengDepartment of Surgery, Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Rohan M GoswamiDivision of Transplant, Research and Innovation, Mayo Clinic in Florida, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.
David F SnipeliskySection of Heart Failure & Cardiac Transplant Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Aubrie M CarrollDepartment of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Samer S NajjarMedstar Heart and Vascular Institute, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Mark BelkinDepartment of Medicine, Section of Cardiology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Jonathan GrinsteinDepartment of Medicine, Section of Cardiology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7053-8928
FLIGHT Working Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInvasive hemodynamics are fundamental in assessing patients with advanced heart failure (HF). Several novel hemodynamic parameters have been studied; however, the relative prognostic potential remains ill-defined. HYPOTHESIS: Advanced hemodynamic parameters provide additional prognostication beyond the standard hemodynamic assessment.

methodsPatients from the PRognostic Evaluation During Invasive CaTheterization for Heart Failure (PREDICT-HF) registry who underwent right heart catheterization (RHC) were included in the analysis. The primary endpoint was survival to orthotopic heart transplant (OHT) or durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD), or death within 6 months of RHC.

resultsOf 846 patients included, 176 (21%) met the primary endpoint. In a multivariate model that included traditional hemodynamic variables, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) (OR: 1.10, 1.04-1.15, p < .001), and cardiac index (CI) (OR: 0.86, 0.81-0.92, p < .001) were shown to be predictive of adverse outcomes. In a separate multivariate model that incorporated advanced hemodynamic parameters, cardiac power output (CPO) (OR: 0.76, 0.71-0.83, p < .001), aortic pulsatility index (API) (OR: 0.94, 0.91-0.96, p < .001), and pulmonary artery pulsatility index (OR: 1.02, 1.00-1.03, p .027) were all significantly associated with the primary outcome. Positively concordant API and CPO afforded the best freedom from the endpoint (94.7%), whilst negatively concordant API and CPO had the worst freedom from the endpoint (61.5%, p < .001). Those with discordant API and CPO had similar freedom from the endpoint.

conclusionThe advanced hemodynamic parameters API and CPO are independently associated with death or the need for OHT or LVAD within 6 months. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these parameters and elucidate their role in patients with advanced HF.

Indexed as

Cardiac CatheterizationHeart FailureHemodynamicsRegistriesAgedFemaleHeart-Assist DevicesHeart TransplantationHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisPulmonary Wedge PressureRetrospective StudiesRisk Assessmentheart failurenovel hemodynamicsprognostication

Identifiers

PMID38838029
PMCPMC11151004

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.