These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Independent prognostic importance of a restrictive left ventricular filling pattern after myocardial infarction: an individual patient meta-analysis: Meta-Analysis Research Group in Echocardiography acute myocardial infarction.
    Author: Meta-Analysis Research Group in Echocardiography (MeRGE) AMI Collaborators, Møller JE, Whalley GA, Dini FL, Doughty RN, Gamble GD, Klein AL, Quintana M, Yu CM.
    Journal: Circulation; 2008 May 20; 117(20):2591-8. PubMed ID: 18474816.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Restrictive mitral filling pattern (RFP), the most severe form of diastolic dysfunction, is a predictor of outcome after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Low power has precluded a definite conclusion on the independent importance of RFP, especially when overall systolic function is preserved. We undertook an individual patient meta-analysis to determine whether RFP is predictive of mortality independently of LV ejection fraction (LVEF), end-systolic volume index, and Killip class in patients after AMI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twelve prospective studies (3396 patients) assessing the relationship between prognosis and Doppler echocardiographic LV filling pattern in patients after AMI were included. Individual patient data from each study were extracted and collated into a single database for analysis. RFP was associated with higher all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 2.67; 95% CI, 2.23 to 3.20; P<0.001) and remained an independent predictor in multivariate analysis with age, gender, and LVEF. The overall prevalence of RFP was 20% but was highest (36%) in the quartile of patients with lowest LVEF (<39%) and lowest (9%) in patients with the highest LVEF (>53%; P<0.0001). RFP remained significant within each quartile of LVEF, and no interaction was found for RFP and LVEF (P=0.42). RFP also predicted mortality in patients with above- and below-median end-systolic volume index (1575 patients) and in different Killip classes (1746 patients). Importantly, when diabetes, current medication, and prior AMI were included in the model, RFP remained an independent predictor of outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Restrictive filling is an important independent predictor of mortality after AMI regardless of LVEF, end-systolic volume index, and Killip class.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]