Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41098018›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of heart failure2025

Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio for risk stratification in acute myocarditis across the left ventricular ejection fraction spectrum.

Cristina Madaudo, Amitai Segev, Emanuele Bobbio, Chiara Baggio, Jonathan Schütze, Piero Gentile, Marta Sanguineti, Luca Monzo, Matteo Schettino, Emma Ferone and 28 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of heart failure, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Post-viral myocarditis.Heart failure reviews · 2026
    Review
  5. Myocarditis Prognostic Score: A New Risk Assessment Tool.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

38 authors.

Cristina MadaudoKing's College London British Heart Foundation Centre of Excellence, School of Cardiovascular Medicine & Sciences, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9151-4335
Amitai SegevCardiovascular Division, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer. The Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat-Gan, Israel.
Emanuele BobbioDepartment of Cardiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Chiara BaggioCardioThoracoVascular Department, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Giuliano-Isontina, Trieste, Italy.
Jonathan SchützeDepartment of Cardiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Piero GentileASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.
Marta SanguinetiDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Genova, Genoa, Italy.
Luca MonzoPoliclinico Casilino, Rome, Italy.
Matteo SchettinoDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Genova, Genoa, Italy.
Emma FeroneKing's College London British Heart Foundation Centre of Excellence, School of Cardiovascular Medicine & Sciences, London, UK.
Ahmed ElsanhouryBerlin Institute of Health (BIH) Center for Regenerative Therapies (BCRT), Berlin, Germany.
Anan YounisCardiovascular Division, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer. The Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat-Gan, Israel.
Matteo PalazziniASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.
Adriana FerroniDepartment of Cardiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Valentina GianiASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.
Matthew SadlerKing's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Mohammad AlbarjasPrincess Royal University Hospital, Orpington, London, UK.
Leonardo CalòPoliclinico Casilino, Rome, Italy.
Christian Lars PolteDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, Institute of Medicine at Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Andrea GarasciaASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.
Stefano FigliozziDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.
Paul A ScottKing's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Ajay M ShahKing's College London British Heart Foundation Centre of Excellence, School of Cardiovascular Medicine & Sciences, London, UK.
Alfredo Ruggero GalassiDepartment of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties (ProMISE) University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Mauro GiaccaKing's College London British Heart Foundation Centre of Excellence, School of Cardiovascular Medicine & Sciences, London, UK.
Gianfranco SinagraCardioThoracoVascular Department, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Giuliano-Isontina, Trieste, Italy.
Entela BollanoDepartment of Cardiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Theresa McDonaghKing's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Carsten TschöpeBerlin Institute of Health (BIH) Center for Regenerative Therapies (BCRT), Berlin, Germany.
Giuseppina NovoDepartment of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties (ProMISE) University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Enrico AmmiratiASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.
Roy BeigelCardiovascular Division, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer. The Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat-Gan, Israel.
Christoph GräniDepartment of Cardiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Marco MerloDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, Institute of Medicine at Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Pietro AmeriDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Genova, Genoa, Italy.
Antonio Cannata *King's College London British Heart Foundation Centre of Excellence, School of Cardiovascular Medicine & Sciences, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7609-6297
Daniel I Bromage *King's College London British Heart Foundation Centre of Excellence, School of Cardiovascular Medicine & Sciences, London, UK.
CAIR Collaboration

Funding

British Heart Foundation CH/1999001/11735British Heart Foundation FS/CRTF/21/24175King's BHF Centre of Research Excellence RE/18/2/34213Medical Research Council Clinician Scientist Fellowship MR/X001881/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsAcute myocarditis (AM) is a heterogeneous clinical condition. Several classification models have been proposed to predict adverse clinical outcomes, but risk stratification remains challenging, particularly for patients presenting with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is a useful tool for risk stratification in patients with AM. This study aimed to compare the predictive accuracy of available risk stratification models, including NLR, for identifying patients with AM at increased risk of adverse events. METHODS AND

resultsThe study included 1150 patients with biopsy- or cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)-proven AM from 10 hospitals in six countries. Baseline clinical, laboratory, echocardiographic and CMR data, and clinical outcomes, were collected. The population was divided into four groups based on published models of high-risk AM (complicated, fulminant, high-risk, and NLR ≥4). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality and heart transplantation. During a median follow-up of 228 weeks (interquartile range 114-339), 63 events occurred in 60 patients (5.2%) who experienced the primary outcome. NLR (area under the curve [AUC] 0.72) performed similarly to complicated (AUC 0.73) and high-risk definitions (AUC 0.73) for the prediction of adverse events, while the fulminant classification showed significantly inferior predictive accuracy (AUC 0.62, p = 0.02). Moreover, among patients with preserved LVEF (≥50%) at presentation, NLR showed superior prognostic value (AUC 0.73; complicated: 0.52, p = 0.001; high-risk: 0.52, p = 0.002). Multivariable analysis confirmed that each classification was independently associated with the primary outcome. However, the NLR model showed better predictive performance compared to the other models among patients with LVEF ≥50%.

conclusionsWhile traditional definitions of high-risk AM remain valuable, NLR ≥4 is a simple and cost-effective marker that aids in risk stratification. NLR ≥4 is particularly robust in patients with preserved LVEF, supporting its use across the LVEF spectrum.

Indexed as

LymphocytesMyocarditisNeutrophilsStroke VolumeVentricular Function, LeftAcute DiseaseAdultEchocardiographyFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance Imaging, CineMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentLymphocyteMyocarditisNeutrophilNeutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratioOutcomesRisk prediction

Identifiers

PMID41098018
PMCPMC12803673

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.