ArticleEchocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.)2025
Comparative Value of Echocardiography vs. Right Heart Catheterization in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.
Article in Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.), 2025. 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.
- Comparative Value of Echocardiography vs. Right Heart Catheterization in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEchocardiography and right heart catheterization (RHC) are useful in the evaluation of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We compared the two among decompensated HFpEF patients to determine their relative value in predicting all-cause mortality and a composite of cardiovascular (CV) death and heart failure (HF) readmission at 1 year.
methodsOne hundred seventy-eight decompensated HFpEF patients who underwent both procedures and survived to hospital discharge were retrospectively identified. Hospital records and the National Death Index were queried to determine outcomes. Echocardiographic and invasive parameters were tested for significant associations with each outcome. Additionally, three predictive models were developed: Model-1: basic demographics and comorbidities, Model-2: adding echocardiographic parameters, and Model-3: adding invasive hemodynamic parameters.
resultsFor mortality (n = 26; 15%), echocardiographic E/average e', invasive mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP), and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) showed significant associations. Model-1 yielded a c-statistic of 0.65; 95% CI (0.54-0.76). Adding echocardiographic and hemodynamic variables produced a nonsignificant increase to 0.71; 95% CI (0.60-0.82), though mPAP remained an independent predictor (OR 1.05; 95% CI 1.01-1.09, p = 0.025). For the composite outcome (n = 31; 17%), significant associations were found for echocardiographic right atrial reservoir strain (RAsr), E/average e', and invasive right atrial pressure, mPAP, and PCWP. Model-1 had a c-statistic of 0.70; 95% CI (0.60-0.79). Adding echocardiographic parameters significantly increased this to 0.81; 95% CI (0.73-0.88). Adding hemodynamic parameters (model-3) resulted in a nonsignificant increase to 0.83; 95% CI (0.76-0.90).
conclusionsAmong decompensated HFpEF patients, the addition of echocardiographic parameters significantly improved model prediction for the composite endpoint of CV death and HF hospitalization. Further addition of invasive hemodynamic variables did not.
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.