ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2026
Predictive value of multivariate models of quantitative myocardial movement parameters for acute myocardial infarction in elderly patients with coronary artery disease.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the association of multivariate models encompassing quantitative myocardial movement parameters with the risk of subsequent acute myocardial infarction (AMI) within 3 months in elderly patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), and to explore their potential predictive value.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective case-control study involving 280 elderly patients diagnosed with CAD, 110 of whom developed AMI within three months post examination (AMI group) and 170 who did not developed AMI. The two groups underwent echocardiographic measurements of several parameters.
resultsSignificant differences were observed in echocardiographic parameters between the AMI and non-AMI groups. Parameters such as ejection fraction, stroke volume, end-systolic volume, end-diastolic volume, and left ventricular wall measurements effectively distinguished patients who developed AMI from those who did not. A joint model yielded an AUC value of 0.985 in the ROC analysis, indicating good predictive performance. Internal validation using bootstrap gave an optimism-corrected AUC of 0.901 (95% CI: 0.872-0.926). The Hosmer‑Leme show test indicated good calibration (χ²=8.32, p = 0.402), and decision curve analysis demonstrated potential clinical usefulness across a range of threshold probabilities.
conclusionOur results suggest a potential for using multivariate models of myocardial movement parameters to predict the risk of AMI in CAD patients. However, owing to the retrospective design and the lack of external validation, these findings should be considered hypothesis‑generating and require prospective validation in independent cohorts. Incorporation of these echocardiographic measurements into routine medical assessments may offer a potentially effective, non-invasive way to improve early detection and management of AMI in patients with CAD.
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.