MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885860918 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy438

The association between blood pressure and long-term outcomes of patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy with and without surgical revascularization: an analysis of the STICH trial

2018· article· en· W2885860918 on OpenAlexaff
Bert Andersson, Lilin She, Ru‐San Tan, Panniyammakal Jeemon, Krzysztof Mokrzycki, Matthias Siepe, Alexander Romanov, Liliana E. Favaloro, Ljubomir T. Djokovic, P. Krishnam Raju, Piotr Bętlejewski, Normand Racine, A Ostrzycki, Weerachai Nawarawong, Siuli Das, Jean L. Rouleau, George Sopko, Kerry L. Lee, Eric J. Velazquez, Julio A. Panza

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineEjection fractionBlood pressureCoronary artery diseaseHeart failureIschemic cardiomyopathyCardiomyopathyRevascularizationRandomized controlled trialMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims: Hypertension (HTN) is a well-known contributor to cardiovascular disease, including heart failure (HF) and coronary artery disease, and is the leading risk factor for premature death world-wide. A J- or U-shaped relationship has been suggested between blood pressure (BP) and clinical outcomes in different studies. However, there is little information about the significance of BP on the outcomes of patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. This study aimed to determine the relationship between BP and mortality outcomes in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy. Methods and results: The influence of BP during a median follow-up of 9.8 years was studied in a total of 1212 patients with ejection fraction ≤35% and coronary disease amenable to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) who were randomized to CABG or medical therapy alone (MED) in the STICH (Surgical Treatment for Ischaemic Heart Failure) trial. Landmark analyses were performed starting at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years after randomization, in which previous systolic BP values were averaged and related to subsequent mortality through the end of follow-up with a median of 9.8 years. Neither a previous history of HTN nor baseline BP had any significant influence on long-term mortality outcomes, nor did they have a significant interaction with MED or CABG treatment. The landmark analyses showed a progressive U-shaped relationship that became strongest at 5 years (χ2 and P-values: 7.08, P = 0.069; 8.72, P = 0.033; 9.86; P = 0.020; 8.31, P = 0.040; 14.52, P = 0.002; at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5-year landmark analyses, respectively). The relationship between diastolic BP (DBP) and outcomes was similar. The most favourable outcomes were observed in the SBP range 120-130, and DBP 75-85 mmHg, whereas lower and higher BP were associated with worse outcomes. There were no differences in BP-lowering medications between groups. Conclusion: A strong U-shaped relationship between BP and mortality outcomes was evident in ischaemic HF patients. The results imply that the optimal SBP might be in the range 120-130 mmHg after intervention, and possibly be subject to pharmacologic action regarding high BP. Further, low BP was a marker of poor outcomes that might require other interactions and treatment strategies. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00023595.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207