ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Integrated left ventricular geometry-function phenotypes and long-term outcomes after acute myocardial infarction.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aims: Left ventricular (LV) remodeling after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a key determinant of long-term outcomes. However, it remains unclear how LV geometry and systolic function interact to influence prognosis in real-world populations. We investigated the combined prognostic impact of LV dilatation and systolic dysfunction in patients with AMI. Methods: We analyzed 19,664 patients with AMI from nationwide Korean multicenter registries. LV geometry-function phenotypes were defined according to LV end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD ≥53 mm for dilatation) and LV ejection fraction (LVEF ≤50% for reduced systolic function), and categorized as non-dilated/preserved (group A), dilated/preserved (group B), non-dilated/reduced (group C), and dilated/reduced (group D). The primary endpoint was 3-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), defined as cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularization, cerebrovascular accident, and cardiovascular readmission. Associations between baseline geometry-function phenotypes and outcomes were assessed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Results: The incidence of MACCE increased stepwise from group A to D (13.2%, 13.5%, 16.8%, and 21.9%, respectively). In fully adjusted analyses, LV dilatation was not associated with increased risk in patients with preserved LVEF [group B vs. group A: hazard ratio (HR), 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-1.29]. In contrast, LV dilatation was associated with a higher risk when accompanied by reduced LVEF [group C: HR, 1.12 (1.01-1.24); group D: HR, 1.44 (1.29-1.60)]. Conclusions: The prognostic significance of LV dilatation after AMI depends on underlying systolic function. While LV dilatation alone may reflect a compensatory process in preserved LVEF, its presence in reduced LVEF identifies a high-risk phenotype. An integrated assessment of LV geometry and function may provide complementary risk stratification beyond conventional LVEF-based assessment.
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.